Burma Update
News and updates on Burma26 March 2010
News on Burma - 26/3/10
UN Chief to Burma: Create conditions for free & fair elections – Margaret Besheer Voice of America: Thu 25 Mar 2010 U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says the government of Burma must create conditions that give all stakeholders the opportunity to participate freely in elections, if the vote is to be viewed as fair and credible.Mr. Ban spoke to reporters after a meeting of his so-called Group of Friends of Myanmar, the other name by which Burma is known. He said the 15 governments which make up the group discussed developments following the military government’s announcement earlier this month of the new election law. The law has raised international concerns because one of its provisions prohibits anyone serving a prison term from voting or being a member of a political party. That would effectively ban National League for Democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners from participating in the general election. No date has been set for the vote, which would be the country’s first in 20 years. Mr. Ban said the electoral law and the overall electoral environment so far fall short of what is needed for an inclusive political process. Speaking on behalf of the Group of Friends, Mr. Ban said they urged the elections be inclusive, participatory and transparent. “We encourage all parties to work in the national interest,” Mr. Ban said. “The government must create conditions that give all stakeholders the opportunity to participate freely in elections. This includes the release of all political prisoners – including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi – and respect for fundamental freedoms.” Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been in detention for 14 of the last 20 years, has said she is opposed to her party registering for the vote, but that the NLD (National League for Democracy) must decide for itself whether to participate in the election. Mr. Ban said if that is her genuine belief, then “we have to respect it.” But he expressed some reservations, saying he did not know the circumstances surrounding her statement. On Wednesday, the U.N. Security Council had its first briefing on Burma in more than six months. British Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant said many council members expressed their concern about the electoral laws, which he said appeared to target Aung San Suu Kyi and her opposition party. Party literature cannot criticize military: Junta Mizzima News: Thu 25 Mar 2010 The Burmese military junta, which has rolled out harsh electoral laws for political parties, making it difficult for many to contest, has now come up with rules for political parties while printing their pamphlets, books or election-related printed matter.Elections have been declared for this year but no date has been announced yet. The announcement on party literature on March 17, says parties have to register for printing election-related matter with the government under the 1962 Printers and Publishers Registration Act. For permission to print, the political party needs to seek permission from the country’s notorious Press Scrutiny and Registration Board (PSRB) within 90 days after they register with the Election Commission. The party literature cannot criticize the military and the present regime, the announcement says. The printed material cannot disturb “law and order and tranquility” of the nation, it added. Moreover, a political party has to deposit 500,000 Kyat (USD 500) for permission to print. The amount will be fully or partially forfeited by the PSRB if a party violates the stringent rules announced. The 1962 Printers and Publishers Registration Act prohibits publications or materials that go against the interests of the government. The penalties for violators of this Act range from the banning of an article to seven years in jail. NLD between a rock and a hard place – Aung Naing Oo Irrawaddy: Thu 25 Mar 2010 Once again, the unmatched power and influence Aung San Suu Kyi, detained leader of the National League for Democracy (NLD), holds over her party may have shown their genuine impact—this time on the NLD’s approach toward the planned general election.The NLD’s central committee is due to meet on March 29 to decide whether or not to contest the election, but Suu Kyi made her own views on the issue crystal clear on Tuesday, saying the party should not register under the recently promulgated election laws. On March 20 (Decision Time Approaches for NLD), I wrote in The Irrawaddy: “If her (Suu Kyi’s) preference [whether or not to contest the election] is made known to the central committee members before the voting, it may sway them towards the direction she chooses.” The day before Suu Kyi made her position known, NLD Spokesman Khin Maung Swe announced that the party’s central executive committee had agreed that the central committee should leave the final decision to Suu Kyi and party Chairman Aung Shwe. Despite the weight of Suu Kyi’s rejection of participation under current conditions, party Chairman Aung Shwe is known to be in favor of the party entering the election. But for now the party’s decision seems to be skewed towards not contesting. Three possible scenarios remain open for the party, although all bring problems and likely divisions. Although the choice appears to be straightforward—a simple “yes” or “no” to participation in the election—it is an extremely complex matter. Scenario-1: The NLD decides not to contest the election This is the most likely scenario now. In this case, the regime-drafted election laws require the party to disband. Pragmatists or moderate factions are then likely to form a political party or two of their own and contest the election under a new banner. The formal abolition of the party will create radicalism among those who remain loyal to it. Undoubtedly, the disbanded NLD will become an underground grouping and find a way to get back into the political arena. Operating outside the legal and constitutional framework, it is likely to join forces with other opposition groups, both inside and outside the country, to discredit the military. Such action will lead to a head-on confrontation with the Burmese junta and its loyalists, especially following a decision evidently influenced by Suu Kyi’s preference not to contest. The NLD is not an underground organization, however, and its strength is not in mass mobilization. So the party may find itself in uncharted territory with aims that may be elusive if not entirely unrealized—unless it can persuade the Burmese to take to the streets and force the junta to renegotiate the terms of the Constitution. If it cannot find political rhythm in underground movement the party is likely to eventually collapse under relentless pressure from the junta, which will surely mount a harsh repressive campaign against the party remnants. In addition, 20 years of struggle have shown that a mass anti-regime movement cannot succeed without at least the tacit support of some key elements within the military. Most importantly, the promulgation of unjust election laws was clearly designed with the purpose of forcing the NLD to opt out of the election on its own volition. All in all, this scenario will play into the trap junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe has set up for the party. Besides, it may not provide the party with a strategy designed for all members with different views to follow. And unlike the Burmese junta, the NLD has not thrived in conflict, which would be prolonged if the party failed to contest the election. Scenario-2: NLD decides to participate, in the interest of survival This possibility seems a long shot now. Ostensibly the NLD would have less than 60 days from its registration to complete the task of nominating its election candidates. The NLD’s strategy in the past 20 years has been to focus on its survival as a legal entity. If this remains its primary preoccupation, the party may try to adopt a step-by-step strategy. A first step would be to register so as to maintain the party’s legality. It would then continue debating the broader strategy, giving it some breathing space. If it wants to focus only on its legal survival, the party has two options. The first is to field only three candidates in the election, meeting the minimum requirement for any registered party—a half-boiled strategy. But the law also requires a party, at the time of registration, to inform the Election Commission (EC) early on whether it intends to contest throughout the country or just in one specific area, such as a state or region. Once it declares its intentions to the EC and says that it will only contest in three constituencies, the party cannot change its mind. But the catch here is that if the party loses in these constituencies, it will likely face the axe and be abolished. To avoid this danger, the party would have to field and win in more than three constituencies in order to make sure that it remains legal in the post election period. The second option, if the party is concerned only about its survival, is to get registered and prepared, and to make the decision before the end of the party registration period. This is also not without problems because voters may punish an undecided party. There is also a possibility that the EC, under the direct orders from the regime, might squash party registration at the last minute, citing irregularities in the registration process. In this case, hard liners within the party will be proven right and the party may go back to the same confrontation mode similar to the first “not to contest scenario.” Under this scenario, emotion will run even higher and a sudden confrontation with the junta is likely. In this scenario, taking a decision to “half participate” may seem a viable option for a short period of time, but in the long run the NLD would be losing an opportunity to take a decisive party stand on the issues at hand. And, unlike in 1990, the party does not have the luxury of time to prepare for the election, and leaving the final decision to the last minute may not be a good tactic. Such a strategy could also make the voters believe that even though the NLD is a party of national calibre, the party only works for its survival and fails to put the interests of the voters and the nation first. Scenario-3: The NLD decides to contest the election In this case, the party will have to disown its detained leader Suu Kyi and all other party officials and members currently serving time in prison. The party expelled Suu Kyi and Tin Oo in 1989 under pressure from the junta, so taking a similar step this time should not be problem because she could be reinstated after her release from house arrest. However, even if party Chairman Aung Shwe decides to enter the election it will upset the hard liners within the party. As a result, the divisions within the party will come to the fore. Some disillusioned members might then resign although they would not become idle. They might be radicalised because of their belief that the party had abandoned its principled approach to democracy of the past 20 years and especially against the wishes of Suu Kyi. Such a situation would create an acrimonious relationship among former comrades, and lead to the two camps undermining each other in the fight for democracy. Under this scenario, contesting the election seems to be a good strategy for the long run. But there is a risk that it does not provide enough options for all with different takes on the election. If the NLD does not know how to deal with those members who disagree with the party’s decision to contest the election and takes drastic actions, the resentful hard liners may undermine any meaningful work the party will embark on after the election. Ideally and acting according to the principles of democracy, the minority party officials who lose to the majority in favor of participating in the election should go along with the decision. However, under the conditions where stakes are high and injustice glaringly apparent, and especially when the minority realizes that they are confronted with only one choice, making a rational choice or cooperating with the majority is unlikely. In summing up, the NLD is caught between a rock and a hard place, with problems, dissatisfaction and disappointment present on whatever path it chooses. And whatever the choice, the party is likely to be deeply divided. Yet somehow, the party must develop an all-inclusive strategy, allowing the engagement of moderates as well as hard liners to engage. Otherwise, the risk is that the NLD will follow the examples of its predecessors, such as the acrimonious split of the parliamentary-era Anti-Fascist Peoples Freedom League, which partly paved the way for the final and long-lasting entry of the Burmese military into the political arena. Divided opinion on NLD party registration – Ba Kaung Irrawaddy: Thu 25 Mar 2010 On March 29, more than 100 National League for Democracy (NLD) party leaders from across the country will meet at the party’s Rangoon headquarters to discuss whether to register the party under the junta’s election law. Though Aung San Suu Kyi has publicly said she is against her party registering, the party leadership remains divided. Longtime Suu Kyi supporter Win Tin, 80, who was released in September 2008 after more than 19 years in prison said he would probably retire if the majority decide to register. Khin Maung Swe, 67, a leading party official who spent 14 years in prison supports registration and joining the election even though this means the party must expel Suu Kyi under the junta law. Both spoke to The Irrawaddy on the party’s future. Win Tin Question: Could you give us three specific reasons why you are for or against party-registration? Answer: If we register the party, we have to expel Daw Suu and other detained party leaders. The details of the party registration laws are not clear about whether Daw Suu could rejoin the party after her release and it would be up to the election commission. The second reason is that if we register the party we have to vow to protect the junta’s Constitution, which we have repeatedly said is unacceptable. The third factor is that after registration, we will have to police the “illegal” activities of party members and warn them they will be expelled if they continue those activities. This will guarantee that no one in the party will dare express his ideas at the risk of imprisonment. Q. What will happen to the NLD if it decides to contest the elections? And what if not? A: If the NLD decides not to contest the elections, two things can happen. Either the NLD will cease to be a valid and registered party or the regime will outlaw the party, causing it to lose its identity and party flag. The dignity of the party will increase immensely when we show we are not giving in to the junta’s unjust law. We will also have a broader space to operate with the public because we will show that the principles the party stands for are more important than its mere existence. Q. Can the NLD expect to gain another landslide victory like it did 20 years ago if it decides to contest the election? A: The 1988 uprising led by students was one of the main causes which gave the NLD a landslide victory in the 1990 elections. Party leaders like U Aung Shwe only got onto the political stage because of the 1988 uprising. In addition, the military was politically quite weak at the time. The situation is totally different now: we are tied up by various laws and if the party contests the election, there is little or no chance for us to win a majority of seats, much less an overwhelming victory. Q. How do you foresee the post-election scenario in Burma? A: This election ensures that two major groups will operate in parliament at different levels: one will be composed of military officers and the other members of multiple political parties made up from business cronies like Tay Za backed by junta groups such as the Union Solidarity and Development Association [USDA] and Swan Arr Shin [a government-organized paramilitary group that suppresses political dissidents]. Besides, the three candidates for the Presidency election will be nominated by the military representatives of the bicameral parliament, but we don’t know the procedure for their election [The presidency electoral law will be drawn up later, according to the constitution.] Moreover, the formation of the government will be in the hands of the future President who can appoint either members of parliament or non-elected persons as cabinet ministers. If the president selects members of parliament from a political party, they can’t represent their party in the government because they not only have to resign their parliamentary seats but they also have to refrain from party activities. Khin Maung Swe Question: Could you give us three specific reasons why you are for or against party-registration? Answer: First, I wish to make it clear that we have no intention of marginalizing Aung San Suu Kyi, who is an icon in Burmese politics. But the reason we wish to register the party is because we want Daw Suu to be able to continue to play in the political environment when she is released five or six months later. That’s why we need a political party. Secondly, we believe that only by struggling in the legal fold will it be possible for us to fulfill our pledge to democracy, to work for changes in the constitution and national reconciliation. Thirdly, in that process, we don’t wish to divide our party members into different groups in contradiction to the party policy of maintaining unity. As there is no viable exit option [if NLD does not register], we don’t support not registering the party because we don’t want to be the historical culprits blamed for letting the party die. Q. What will happen to the NLD if it decides to contest the elections? And what if not? A: If the party participates in the election, it can become a competitive force in the future parliament, contributing to a check-and-balance system in politics that will be in the interests of people. Without political opposition, we will only be left with a sort of one-party political system. If we don’t join the election, the people will lose a great party born of the 1988 uprising and faithful to the struggle for democracy, and the people will not have a party to vote for in the election. Q. Can the NLD expect to gain another landslide victory like it did 20 years ago if it decides to contest the election? A: I am not sure about a landslide victory, but the party still has the potential to become a competitive force in the parliament. Q. How do you foresee the post-election scenario in Burma? A: With military supremacy continuing in the post-election era notwithstanding, the rigid centralization we have today will disappear. By that, I mean the different governmental departments will no longer be under the control of a single person. The legislature will be in a position to change inappropriate laws, including the unjust election law. The more than 75 majority requirement only applies to amendments of the Constitution, which is where the 25 percent of seats reserved for the military will be most significant. But parliament will still have the power to pass bills addressing human rights abuses and socio-economic issues in our country. A Survey of NLD Officials on the 2010 Election By THE IRRAWADDY The National League for Democracy now faces a critical choice and must make a historic decision on whether it will re-register as a political party and contest the Burmese election or face dissolution. The NLD will discuss the issue on March 29 in a meeting of the party’s central committee at its headquarters in Rangoon. The Irrawaddy is now surveying the opinions of NLD officials at the township level. Click here to see result. 15 more parties to register – Kyaw Thein Kha Irrawaddy: Wed 24 Mar 2010 Fifteen parties have confirmed that they will register for this year’s election.The parties will join two other political organizations—the Union of Myanmar Federation of National Politics (formerly known as the Union of Myanmar National Political Force) and the 88 Generation Student Youths (Union of Myanmar)—that registered on Monday to contest the election. Four of the parties planning to register previously belonged to the National Political Alliance (NPA), a group consisting of nine small political parties that was formed after the Burmese junta announced its election law on March 8. Under the law, all parties must register by May 7. Two of the four former NPA members, the Demo NLD and the Reconciliation Research and Analysis Study Group, will register together as the United Democratic Party. The new party plans to contest nationwide. The two other former NPA members will contest the election regionally. The Nationalist NLD (which, like the Demo NLD, includes former members of the NLD) will contest in Mandalay Division and the Union of Myanmar National Force Arakan State will contest in Arakan State. So far, nine parties have told The Irrawaddy that they will contest nationwide, while another six parties say they intend to run in their respective regions. The following parties have registered or plan to register to contest the election nationally: 1. Union of Myanmar Federation of National Politics (registered) 2. 88 Generation Student Youths (Union of Myanmar) (registered) 3. National Unity Party 4. National Political Alliance 5. Union Democratic Alliance 6. Democratic Party 7. Union Solidarity and Development Association (expected to form more than one party) 8. United Democratic Party 9. Peace and Diversity Party 10. A party formed by Phyo Min Thein (the name of the party hasn’t been announced yet) 11. A party formed by self-described “Myanmar Bengalis” (the name of the party hasn’t been announced) The following parties will contest regionally: 1. Kachin State Progressive Party 2. The Union of Myanmar National Force Arakan State 3. Mon National Democratic Front 4. Karen People’s Party 5. Nationalist NLD 6. Scientific National Politics Party, based in Maymyo (Pyin Oo Lwin) The following parties contested in the 1990 election but have not yet registered for this year’s election: 1. National League for Democracy 2. National Unity Party 3. Shan National League for Democracy 4. Union Pa-o National Organization 5. Shan State Kokang Democratic Party 6. Mro or Khami National Solidarity Organization 7. Lahu National Development Party 8. Union Karen League 9. Kokang Democracy and Unity Party 10. Wa National Development Party The NLD will decide on whether to register or not on March 29, but the party’s leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, has already stated that she is not in favor of the move. The NUP, which ran as the main junta-backed party during the 1990 election, said it has decided to contest the election and will register next week. Junta prepares to take on the ethnic militias – Thilo Thielke Der Spiegel: Wed 24 Mar 2010 After years of relative peace, Burma’s military junta is trying to break the power of guerilla armies in the drug-infested Golden Triangle. The ethnic armies may end up posing a greater threat to the regime than the democracy movement and its icon Aung San Suu Kyi.The village of Doi Tailaeng, on Burma’s border with Thailand, has been transformed into a military camp. For hours, columns of uniformed fighters have been marching through this outpost of the rebellious Shan people, which feels oppressed by Burma’s majority ethnic group, the Burman. There are several thousand rebel soldiers in Doi Tailaeng, and they have just completed their military training. The dust rises under the boots of the recruits. The Shan national festival is solely a show of power. The militia fighters repeatedly point their guns at the sky and fire salvos into the clear mountain air, accompanied by the deafening noise of drums and fanfares. At the end of the parade, a Buddhist monk blesses the rebels of the “Shan State Army – South” with holy water. For years, the Shan State Army (SSA) has been waging a desperate and costly guerilla war against the Burmese army. The SSA consists of about 10,000 fighters, waging war against the Junta’s vastly larger army of 400,000 soldiers. “We are preparing for new battles,” says Sao Yawd Serk, 51, the leader of both the Shan State Army and the movement’s political wing. Until now, it has only been the remoteness of this mountainous border region that has kept his men from being wiped out. Other rebel groups have also doggedly kept up their struggle against the clique of generals in the new Burmese capital, Naypyidaw, including the Karen National Liberation Army and a handful of militia organizations fighting for other ethnic groups. Fragile Peace Most of the country’s other ethnic minorities and their fighters signed a truce with the government in 1989, in return for being granted extensive autonomy in their regions. They were also permitted to keep their weapons and go about their business, which includes growing opium, producing methamphetamines like Crystal Meth and operating casinos in the border region near China. The warlords are running a profitable business in the Golden Triangle, but the fragile peace has come at a high price. Within the last three years, the amount of land devoted to growing opium has grown by almost 50 percent, to 31,700 hectares (78,300 acres). Pills produced in Burma are now flooding the rest of Southeast Asia. These drug revenues are then used to fund powerful armies. The militia representing the Wa ethnic group, the United Wa State Army (UWSA), which formed in 1989 after the collapse of the China-backed Communist Party of Burma, is estimated at about 25,000 combat-ready troops. But now the fragile peace is at risk. The junta plans to hold an election this year and use it to cement its power. Foreign observers and critics in Burma say the election will be a farce. For example, the country’s election laws, which the junta has fashioned in its favor, expressly prohibit Aung San Suu Kyi from participating in the election. The 64-year-old Nobel Peace Prize Winner has been under house arrest for years. The ethnic minority armies operating in Burma’s border regions could now prove to be a much bigger threat to the government than Burma’s icon of freedom, Suu Kyi. The government has given the militias an ultimatum: Either their fighters allow themselves to be voluntarily integrated into the regular border troops, thereby partly submitting to the command of the Burmese army, or the army will disarm the militias by force. Unequally Matched Adversaries So far few of the many combat groups have indicated a willingness to give into the junta’s demands. For most, integration into the border troops would amount to capitulation. As a result, two unequal sets of adversaries face off in the largely impenetrable jungle regions of the northeast, eying each other warily. The junta is apparently serious about its plans to break up the groups of armed ethnic fighters. Under the pretense of removing an illegal weapons factory in the region inhabited by the Kokang people near the Chinese border, the army attacked its militias in August 2009 and drove about 37,000 Kokang into neighboring China. Since then, a warlike state has prevailed in this part of Burma, and it now threatens to expand into a guerilla war between unequally matched adversaries, a war that could last for years and that no one can win. The leader of the SSA, Yawd Serk, is openly preparing his troops for new battles. From his command post in the mountains, he has a good overview of the surrounding terrain. The rugged mountains along the Thai border form a natural and almost impenetrable fortress. Not far away, trenches permeate the green hills, while the Wa army lurks behind the hills. “Perhaps we will be fighting the government together soon,” Yawd Serk says hopefully. “We know that the Wa military leaders are itching for a fight.” *Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan Burmese Army wraps up first phase of militia training in Kachin State Kachin News Group: Wed 24 Mar 2010 With the Border Guard Force issue yet to be resolved and tension mounting, the first phase of the 11-day militia training in Kachin State in the north was wrapped up by the Burmese Army after the junta announced the electoral laws on March 8, said local residents.The militia training to the first batch called the “1/2010 militia basic combat battle training” was given by Burmese Army trainers to 80 residents of Tatkone quarter, one of the largest ethnic Kachin quarters in Kachin State’s capital Myitkyina, local trainees told Kachin News Group. The training began on March 8, the same day that the junta released the electoral laws and was concluded on March 19, the trainees said. All trainees were Kachin men and they were forced to join the Burmese Army’s basic combat training by local military authorities reluctantly, they added. During the training period, the civilian trainees were especially trained in basic combat like soldiers with machine guns, said eyewitnesses. The second phase of militia training for local civilians is also underway in different quarters in Myitkyina, said local residents. In Puta-O, the remote and landlocked town in northern Kachin State, the Burmese Army is preparing to give the same basic combat training to local civilians, said Puta-O residents. Burmese soldiers trained the “basic combat battle training” to Kachin civilians in Myitkyina in Kachin State, northern Burma before the countrywide elections in this year. Photo: Kachin News Group. In Bhamo late last year, civilians from each quarter and village were forcibly assembled in the guise of “reserved firefighters” but they were given basic combat training by Burmese military trainers, said residents of Bhamo. Local members of the junta-back Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA) in Myitkyina and Bhamo also have to take basic combat training from the Burmese Army, said members of USDA in the two cities. In Kachin State, the junta forcibly recruited local civilians in the name of “reserved firefighters” and they were given basic combat training since the Buddhist monk-led anti-junta demonstration in 2007, according to local sources. People in Kachin State believe that the junta is preparing for an offensive against the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO), the last remaining Kachin ceasefire group which has refused to transform its armed-wing to the junta-proposed Border Guard Force. A lack of independence, impartiality – Kay Latt Irrawaddy: Wed 24 Mar 2010 The election will definitely be held sometime in 2010, but the jury is still out on how we should look at the election: as opportunity or as a rigged process.The Burmese regime has now issued five laws related to the election including Election Commission regulations and Political Parties Registration laws, which are revisions of the 1990 electoral law. Already, international bodies and governments around the world have condemned the laws as short of international standards and lacking in credibility for a free and fair election. The governments of the United States, Canada, Britain and even Asean governments such as the Philippines and Indonesia view the laws with deep disappointment, saying the election will not be credible. Why don’t they accept the election laws? First, there’s the issue of the independence of the Election Commission. Each member of the commission was handpicked by the junta. Many people believe the commission will favor the regime in making its decisions and wielding authority. The previous election commission which supervised the 1990 election was formed by the former socialist government before the military coup in 1988. After the military coup, Gen Saw Maung, the coup leader, appointed election commission members and said the military would not interfere in its work. The commission was granted the right to draw up the electoral law independently. The commission publicly issued a draft law and invited political parties and the public to comment. The commission then revised the draft law and submitted it to the junta which issued it on May 31, 1989, one year before of the date of the election. The new election law was drafted by the generals unilaterally without public input. Closely affiliated with the regime, the Election Commission chairman was a member of the junta’s Constitution drafting commission, and he also served as a military judge advocate general. Internationally, an election commission is an organization which has various duties including collecting voter lists, examining candidate applications, announcing the list of candidates, conducting polls, counting and tabulating votes, with additional functions such as boundary delimitation, voter registration, the registration of political parties, electoral dispute resolution and civic and voter education. Moreover, such commissions can regulate the conduct of political parties and candidates during the election process. Among the key responsibilities is the registration of political parties. The commission may deny the registration of a political party, such as the National League for Democracy, if the party includes political prisoners as members or leaders, such as Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. Through her lawyers, Suu Kyi recently remarked that the law should not be aimed at one particular person or organization, a charge alleged by many international groups and governments. Parties or candidates can also be denied registration if the commission determines that they owe allegiance to a foreign government, are subjects of a foreign government or who are entitled to enjoy the rights and privileges of a subject of a foreign government, or a citizen of a foreign country. Again, the commission’s decision is final. The commission can also deny registration to a party or candidate that obtains and uses directly or indirectly financial support, land, housing, buildings, vehicles or property from government or religious organizations or organizations of a foreign country. Chapter (11) of the electoral laws grants the commission the authority to postpone the election in constituencies on the ground of natural disaster or security. The commission can also move a polling station to a safer location. After the election, the commission is authorized to form a complaint body, which will hear accusations if a candidate is accused of violating election laws, and then make an appropriate ruling. Analysts worry that with such wide-ranging authority and discretionary power, the Election Commission could directly affect the election’s outcome in favor of the regime because of the commission members’ lack of independence and impartiality. Suu Kyi ‘opposes election role for her party’ BBC News: Tue 23 Mar 2010 Burma’s detained pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi opposes her party registering for forthcoming elections, her lawyer has said. Nyan Win said Ms Suu Kyi told him the National League for Democracy (NLD) should “not even think” of taking part under what she called unjust laws. Burma’s leaders say they will hold the first polls in two decades this year. They recently enacted election laws which prevent key figures – including Ms Suu Kyi – from taking part. The laws have been widely criticised. The US called them a setback for political dialogue in the country. The NLD is due to meet on 29 March to decide whether to participate in the polls – for which no date has yet been set. Leaders excluded The NLD won the last elections in 1990 but was never allowed to take power. Ms Suu Kyi has spent much of the past two decades in some form of detention. According to Nyan Win, Ms Suu Kyi said that she would allow the NLD to make its own decision despite her opposition. “She will never accept registration under unjust laws, but her personal opinion is not to give orders nor instructions to the NLD,” the lawyer quoted her as saying. The laws, published earlier this month, state that parties cannot have any members with criminal convictions. This rules out many of the NLD’s top leaders – including Ms Suu Kyi – who have been jailed on political charges. If the NLD does choose to register for the polls, it must exclude its highest-profile personnel. The laws also ban members of religious orders and civil servants from joining political parties. Buddhist monks were the driving forces behind anti-junta protests in 2007. Opposition to sue Myanmar junta over election laws Associated Press: Tue 23 Mar 2010 Yangon, Myanmar — Myanmar’s highest court Tuesday refused to accept a lawsuit by Aung San Suu Kyi’s political party seeking to revoke laws that bar the detained leader and other opposition members from taking part in the country’s first election in two decades. Lawyer Kyi Win said the Supreme Court refused to accept the lawsuit, saying it did not have power to handle such a case. It was unclear what steps if any the party would next take in its efforts to quash five election-related laws the ruling military enacted earlier this month that set out rules for this year’s vote. One law prohibits anyone convicted of a crime from being a member of a political party and instructs parties to expel convicted members or face de-registration. The lawsuit was largely symbolic since Myanmar’s courts invariably adhere to the junta’s policies, especially on political matters. The National League for Democracy’s general secretary and one of its founders, Suu Kyi was convicted last year on charges of violating her house arrest when an American man swam uninvited to her lakeside property. She is serving an 18-month term of house arrest and many top members of her party and ethnic-based parties are in prison. Under the new laws they would be barred from the vote. “We are taking the legal step against the electoral laws as they are unfair and the laws are a violation of human rights, personal rights and organizational rights,” said Nyan Win, a party spokesman, before the attempted lodging of the lawsuit against the ruling State Peace and Development Council. The polls will be the first since 1990, when Suu Kyi’s party won a landslide victory. The junta ignored the results of that vote and has kept the Nobel Peace laureate jailed or under detention for 14 of the past 20 years. The junta says the new laws have formally invalidated the results of the 1990 election because the election law under which those polls were held was repealed by the new legislation. The elections are part of the junta’s long-announced “roadmap to democracy,” which critics deride as a sham designed to cement the military’s power. No vote date has been set and the NLD has not decided whether it will take part. The party will decide Friday whether to officially register, the first step toward participating in the elections. The party has also written a letter to junta leader Senior Gen. Than Shwe asking its leaders be allowed to have a meeting with Suu Kyi to discuss future policies. Worries spread regarding NLD split – Phanida Mizzima News: Mon 22 Mar 2010 Chiang Mai – Fears are the ranks of the National League for Democracy (NLD) could fracture following a contentious debate within party leadership on whether the party should re-register or not. Aung Shwe, Chairman of the main opposition party, reportedly proposed re-registration at a March 15th meeting at party headquarters in Rangoon in order to secure the party’s survival. However, the debate remains hotly contested as to whether or not Burma’s primary opposition party should re-register with an eye to possible participation in the 2010 elections. “The party could split into two factions owing to discussion on whether to participate in the election or not. The party should negotiate with the SPDC [Burmese junta] and within party membership as well. I believe the leadership can make a correct decision,” said Khin Nyunt Mu, Secretary of the NLD’s Women’s Affairs Working Group in Pegu Division. All political parties must register with the election commission within 60 days from March 17th according to the recently enactednld-office-ygn1 Political Party Registration Law. At present there are ten political parties remaining from the 1990 general elections, including the NLD. The NLD has to date reiterated its intent to stand by its Shwegondaing Declaration, which calls on the military junta to release all political prisoners including Aung San Suu Kyi, a review of the 2008 constitution, recognition of the 1990 general election results and commencement of a dialogue aimed at national reconciliation. The Declaration echoes ideas debated and agreed upon by political prisoners during the course of the 1990s, which outlined perceived conditions relating to the release of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Khin Maung Swe, a Central Executive Committee member of the NLD, said the party should re-register, with the envisioned release of Aung San Suu Kyi providing for a readily available base of leadership. “While we have not yet made clear a decision on whether to join the election or not, it is critical for the party to re-register. If we accept we are united with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, there must be a political party. When she is released she will definitely come to join us,” argued Khin Maung Swe. However, sources close to the NLD said there is a division within the top 20 members of the party’s leadership, with Chairman Aung Shwe, Khin Maung Swe and Dr. Than Nyein heading a pro-registration faction opposed by the likes of Win Tin, Nyan Win and Ohn Kyaing. As the decision appears deadlocked at the Central Executive Committee level, half of whose members remain incarcerated, the party has called for a March 29th meeting of the 100 Central Committee members to assist in deciding the matter. If the NLD leadership chooses to enter the election, contends Khin Saw Htay of the NLD’s Women’s Affairs Working Group in Magway Division, “they would thereby default on their longstanding claim for the results of the1990 elections to be honored.” “In the case of making a decision for the party on whether to join in the new election or not, every Central Committee member must show their courage. I worry they will vote pro-election since they are in fear of arrest. If so, I denounce them for the sake of ending the military dictatorship,” she said. Today, NLD members from Meik-Hti-Lar Township in Mandalay Division sent a letter to party headquarters proposing an open voting system in making the decision. “A person should openly stand for his or her political position. I call on them to openly state their position,” remarked Myint Myint Aye, a party member downgraded to ordinary party member status due to a violation of party regulations in February of this year. She faults party leadership for a lack of preparation to the present crisis. Tin Oo, Vice-Chairman of the NLD, himself recently released from house arrest, has yet to make any public statement regarding party re-registration. But he has stated he will stand together with Aung San Suu Kyi no matter her decision. According to election laws, prisoners are not allowed to stand for election, let alone be members of political parties. Aung San Suu Kyi is currently serving an 18-month sentence for purportedly harboring an American man who gained illegal access to her lakeside compound in May 2009. Political parties begin to register in Naypyidaw – Ko Htwe Irrawaddy: Mon 22 Mar 2010 Two political parties—the 88 Generation Students of the Union of Myanmar (GSUM) and the Union of Myanmar National Political Force (UMNPF)—were the first to register on Monday to participate in the planned general election.Representatives of the two parties traveled from Rangoon to the Burmese capital, Naypyidaw, to register at the Election Commission office there. The GSUM was the first to hand in its registration application. UMNPF Chairman Aye Lwin told The Irrawaddy on Monday: “Our country lags behind in comparison to others. I feel we have a chance to solve that problem in a political way.” The UMNPF and the GSUM have close associations. Aye Lwin’s younger brother, Ye Htun, is expected to be named chairman of the GSUM. The GSUM is distinct from the original 88 Students Generation group led by prominent former students—including Min Ko Naing and Ko Ko Gyi—who are now in prison. Aye Lwin, a 46-year-old former political prisoner, started his own political group in 2005. His close contacts with regime officials (he had a meeting with Rangoon’s mayor, Maj-Gen Aung Thein Lin, five months ago) have made him unpopular with young activists, who accuse him of accepting substantial financial support from them. Several other parties say they will register before the 60-day deadline expires. Democratic Party leader Thu Wai said his party’s central executive had decided on Sunday to send a representative to Naypyidaw to register. Han Shwe, executive member of the National Unity party, said: “Our party will also register within the fixed date.” A number of ethnic groups also say they are preparing to register as political parties. Manam Tu Ja, joint chairman of the Kachin Independence Organization (KIO), who resigned to form the Kachin State Progressive Party (KSPP), said the KSPP would register before the annual Water Festival in April. Shwe Ohn, a prominent Shan leader said his party, whose name has not yet been confirmed, also intended to register within the next 10 days. The newly promulgated election laws require parties to pay a registration fee of 300,000 kyat ($300) and 500,000 kyat ($500) for each candidate fielded in the election. New Mon Party to join election – Lawi Weng Irrawaddy: Mon 22 Mar 2010 The Mon will officially announce a new political party on March 31 to represent the Mon people in the election, according to Mon sources, who added that the new party was formed last year in Moulmein and has a name and a written constitution.Speaking with The Irrawaddy on Monday, Min Soe Lin, a committee member of the new Mon political party and an executive member of the Mon National Democratic Front (MNDF), said: “The new party has a five-member advisory board and a 15-member committee that includes three Mon Buddhist monks.” Min Soe Lin was one of five MNDF representatives who won seats when the party ran in the 1990 election. After the election the junta disbanded the party and arrested at least four of the elected representatives including Min Soe Lin, who was sentenced to seven years in prison. The new party is ready to register and participate in the election, he said, but after a meeting on March 15, they decided to delay making an official announcement until after the main opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), announces on March 29 whether they will participate in the election. “If the NLD doesn’t join the election, four committee members including myself will not join the new party because we disagree with the 2008 Constitution,” he said, adding that 11 committee members would remain. The new Mon political party currently comprises some former central committee members of the New Mon State Party (NMSP), which is the Mon armed wing that entered a ceasefire agreement with the junta in 1995, the MNDF and other respected community leaders in Mon State. Two executive members from the MNDF will join the new political party, according to Mon sources. Mon leaders are divided on whether to participate in the election, meanwhile. Those who don’t accept the 2008 Constitution view the election as a sham and say it will not be free and fair. Nai Hang Thar, the secretary for the NMSP, told The Irrawaddy on Monday that the new constitution denies fundamental ethnic rights and will allow the military to hold onto power. “The junta are holding an election because their main political goal is to supersede the 1990 election result that gave the NLD victory and legalize their military rule,” he said. Other Mon leaders believe the election could offer an opportunity and they will continue to fight for Mon freedom in the new Burmese parliament even after the junta takes 25 percent of the seats. The NMSP announced last year that it will not participate in the election. The NMSP leaders believe that they must maintain their armed wing because Burma is controlled by a military government. To avoid increasing tensions among its members, however, the NMSP leaders said they would allow members to resign and join the new Mon political party if they wished. Mon leaders believe that letting the NMSP maintain its armed wing to continue the potential for armed struggle while the new Mon political party takes the fight to the democratic stage is the right strategy. Many Mon observers in Mon State, meanwhile, say they do not trust the junta to hold a free and fair election and they don’t believe the new Mon political party will gain any freedom for the Mon people. Sources in Moulmein said the new Mon political party including former NMSP central committee members are currently working together mobilizing youths in Mon State for the election in 2010. Tata Motors to build heavy truck plant in Myanmar – Nikhil Gulati Wall Street Journal: Mon 22 Mar 2010 New Delhi –Tata Motors Ltd., India’s biggest auto maker by revenue, said Monday it has signed a pact with Myanmar Automobile & Diesel Industries Ltd. to set up a factory for making heavy trucks in the Southeast Asian country.The factory at Magwe in Myanmar is expected to be operational during January-March 2011, Tata Motors said. The factory will have an annual capacity to make 1,000 vehicles and can be expanded to 5,000 a year, it said. The company didn’t give any financial details, but said the project will be funded by a line of credit from the Indian government. Asean should take a stand on Burma – Editorial Bangkok Post: Mon 22 Mar 2010 As the general election in Burma, still scheduled for “sometime this year”, draws ever closer, it is time for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) to seriously consider a review of the grouping’s famous policy of non-intervention. Especially after the recently announced election laws. There are few experienced Burma watchers who hold out much hope that the elections will do much to break the military junta’s grip on power or bring about a more hopeful situation for its people.One of the election laws requires that the National League for Democracy (NLD) expel its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, because she is serving a suspended sentence under house arrest. Even more distressing, UN special envoy Tomas Quintana, who visited Burma last month, told the UN Human Rights Council that the elections due this year could not be credible, because the ruling State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) had failed to remedy human rights abuses including the recruitment of child soldiers and the jailing of more than 2,000 prisoners of conscience. Mr Quintana has recommended a UN inquiry into whether war crimes and crimes against humanity are being committed there. It appears that as the election approaches increased tensions are developing between the government and a number of ethnic groups. An Associated Press report on Friday quoted the general secretary of the Karen National Union (KNU), Zipporah Sein, as saying at a news conference in Bangkok that the ”risk of armed conflict between powerful ethnic minority groups and the military regime is at its highest level in more than two decades as contentious national elections loom on the horizon”. The KNU’s military wing, the Karen National Liberation Army, is Burma’s largest ethnic army, and has for some time engaged in fighting against Burmese troops, which it says is strictly to protect Karen civilians. Independent reports from human rights organisations and the UN confirm that the Burmese army is attacking and deliberately targeting civilians. There are reports that other armed ethnic groups like the Kachin Independence Army and groups which have signed ceasefire agreements with the government, such as the Wa State Army and the New Mon State Party, are also preparing for a possible war. In these areas the rising tensions are due in large part to a government plan to transform the armed ceasefire groups into a Border Guard Force under its control. While in more normal circumstances this may be a good idea, the history of mistrust between the government and most of these groups probably makes this an impossibility under such short notice. Zipporah Sein, the first woman leader of the KNU, has said: ”The military is sending troops to the areas of the ceasefire groups and they are ready to fight if attacked. So the tension is rising between them.” Individually, many influential people within the region, including some government leaders, have spoken out against the situation in Burma in the run-up to the election, but Asean has officially remained silent. Failure to articulate a principled stand on the Burmese government’s flagrant disregard for accepted international election standards of inclusiveness and transparency, and even more importantly, on the many apparent human rights violations, could seriously hurt Asean’s credibility in the international community. Moreover, such a failure amounts to a refusal to make the attempt to restrain the SPDC from one of the few quarters which may have real influence on the Burmese leadership. This applies also to China, which continually blocks efforts in the UN Security Council to put pressure on Burma. Most recently this was done when British Prime Minister Gordon Brown requested an emergency meeting to discuss the Burmese electoral laws. Also last week, China’s representative to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva said there has been an improvement in Burma’s human rights performance despite recent statements like the one coming from Mr Quintana. It is important for Asean and China to realise that any short-term gains from placating Burma may be far outweighed by the consequences of allowing the SPDC to continue in its present course. Burma’s long, hard road to democracy – Achara Ashayagachat Bangkok Post: Mon 22 Mar 2010 Burma might need three or four more elections before it could have a working democracy, but it has to start with the first election, according to leading dissidents.But many activists remained unconvinced, saying the general election is intended only to whitewash the entrenched military rule. Harn Yawnghwe, executive director of Brussels-based Euro-Burma Office, said there was nothing much the outsiders could do – Asean and China strictly hold on to the non-interference principle while the US seemed to be obsessed with Afghanistan, Iran and other concerns. But it did not mean that these countries were not involved. “Asean will eventually accept the election, no matter what the results will be, hopefully not blatantly,” said Mr Harn, of Shan ethnic, at Chulalongkorn University’s public forum Monday on “Myanmar/Burma – Domestic Developments and International Responses.” Inside Burma, there also seemed to be very limited options, “Certainly, the military will not allow people a lot of chances and they will not bring about democracy, but people inside the country needed to maximize the chance of having its first election in two decades,” said the senior Shan dissident. The election law has already stipulated that if political parties or politicians boycott this election, the running candidate would automatically win, no matter what. “The ethnic groups have to participate in this election, and they are doing so. Burma might need a few more elections before we could see some working democracy,” Mr Harn said. Aung Naing Oo, a Burmese student leader during the 1980s, said the general election would open room for newcomers, unknown faces of various minorities in political scenes, and these candidates, although most of them had military backgrounds, should not be considered in a negative light. “Inside the limited narrow choice of work, many ethnic people inevitably join the military. But these people are not necessarily evil. They are not stupid but well-educated—so they should be better than the blatant military SPDC,” said Mr Naing Oo, who advocated engagement with the Burmese junta. He told a strong audience this morning that election would lead to long term prospect for bottom-up democracy, “This is a step that you must take, there’s no other way. We might need another 3-4 elections before we can see some positive light,” said the Chiang Mai-based analyst. However, Khin Omar, coordinator of Burma Partnership, said the people inside Burma needed a really inclusive, transparent process that respects the rights of all peoples of Burma, not the current restricted environment. “The key mechanism through which the junta has guaranteed its continued grip on power is the 2008 constitution that cements their authority in the three branches of government,” said Ms Omar. While new regional and state parliaments would provide some representation for ethnic political voices, the constitution rejected their long-standing demands for federalism. “The election may not be even held in many ethnic areas,” said the Mae Sot-based activist. Mr Harn argued that there was no ideal situation available, “Sixty years of armed struggle could not overthrow the junta either, so we have to make most use of the opportunity.” Mr Naing Oo said a semi-military government was better than a blunt military administration and this was a golden opportunity for both the junta and Asean to endorse each other. “There are in fact a lot of similarities between Burma and other Asean partners.” But Western diplomats still encouraged Burma’s neighbours, particularly Thailand, Asean, China, and India to “do something”. Canadian ambassador Ron Hoffmann said international community’s strategies regarding Burma have remained divided, yet Burma issue was still part of the G 8 political security concern. Canada, where the majority of the 5,000 refugee population is from Burma, is now the president of the Group of heavyweight countries (G8). Mr Hoffmann conceded that while sanctions would still continue, the international community needed to recognise there were wide views on the ground. “Canada’s civil society against the regime is quite strong but we are still hesitant to close the space completely,” the Canadian ambassador to Thailand said. The election might not be free and fair but there’s a painful decision to make by the people there — whether to endorse the poll or risk the status quo. Despite the disunity in the approach to Burma, the ambassador said, there should be common space or issue. All the neighbouring countries including Thailand, Asean, China, and India should communicate with the Burmese government and greater dialogue needed to be forged and a commitment on human rights and free and fair elections was a necessity. “Asean and China have a non-interference policy but it is time they made a tough decision. Asean, in particular, has been in real dilemma but it is increasingly emerged as a grouping with its own human rights mechanism, therefore they have a legitimate role to play on Burma,” said Mr Hoffmann. While he urged Burma’s neighbours to “do something”, he felt the G8 and Canada needed to be agile and evaluating —“a policy stance that is changeable to the situation”. George Kent, the US embassy political counselor, said Washington’s stance has been similar to other regional players here who would like to see a dialogue between key stakeholders including opposition and ethnic groups, but since last November’s visit by US senior officials to the country, there did not seem to be any positive signals. “The election laws show unwillingness toward that ends. It’s also disappointing to see the election commission was handpicked by the regime,” said Mr Kent. Like other Western diplomats, Mr Kent observed that Asean after expressing blunt concerns on Burma’s development at the Asean meetings in Phuket, had become silent. Its earlier hope— a tripartite core group, a coordinating mechanism on Post-Nargis Humanitarian Assistance, which was regarded as Asean window of opportunity to work with the military regime, has been wrapped up. So the Asean hope was also dashed, said the American diplomat. Yet, he urged Thailand, Asean and all other players in the region that it was now more critical in expressing and sharing concerns privately and publicly with Burma that there must be some positive change and inclusive process within the country. China comes to junta’s rescue again – Wai Moe Irrawaddy: Mon 22 Mar 2010 Beijing has once again come to the defense of Burma’s ruling junta, using its permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to block a move by the UK to raise the issue of the regime’s recently announced electoral laws.“A number of council members support the idea of discussing Burma and getting an update on the situation there. It’s the subject of negotiations with the Chinese at the moment, who are always reluctant on these matters,” a Western diplomat told Reuters on Friday. Following the announcement of new electoral laws on March 8 that ban Burma’s pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and other dissidents from contesting this year’s planned election, Burma’s ruling generals have faced a fresh wave of international condemnation. In an effort to apply pressure on the junta to review the laws, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, whose country is also a permanent member of the UNSC, sent a letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon earlier this week requesting an emergency meeting to discuss the matter. “Burma has ignored the demands of the UN Security Council, the UN Secretary-General, the US, EU and its neighbors by imposing restrictive and unfair terms on elections,” Brown said on Monday, adding that the UK would seek international support to impose an arms embargo against Burma. According to The Inner City Press, a news agency focusing on UN affairs, Mark Lyall Grant, London’s Permanent Representative to the UN, walked into the UNSC meeting on Tuesday morning to talk about Brown’s letter. Instead of agreeing to a UNSC meeting on Burma, however, Ban requested a meeting of the Group of Friends of the Secretary-General on Myanmar [Burma] on March 25. The Group of Friends includes Australia, China, France, India, Indonesia, Japan, Norway, Russia, Singapore, Thailand, the UK, the US, Vietnam and the president of the EU, a position currently occupied by Spain. It was formed in December 2007 as part of a renewed effort to find an international consensus to deal with Burma following the junta’s crackdown on monk-led mass demonstrations in September of that year. On Monday, Beijing also offered its support to the junta at a meeting of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. China’s representative to the council, Luo Cheng, said there has been an improvement in Burma human rights situation. He added that China appreciated the regime’s efforts to achieve political reconciliation. China also prevented the UNSC from taking up the subject of Burma in October 2009, when the matter was raised by the US and its allies. At the time, China said the council should focus on civilian casualties in Afghanistan instead of Burma. Despite this show of public support for the regime, however, some Chinese experts on Burma said policy makers in Beijing were also disappointed by Naypyidaw’s election laws, which rejected international calls for inclusive elections. A Chinese scholar on Burma who spoke on condition of anonymity said that the laws were not just a source of concern for the West, but also for China. China is also worried about ethnic issues along the Sino-Burmese border. Tensions between Naypyidaw and border-based armed ceasefire groups have been growing since last year over the regime’s demands for the groups to transform themselves into border guard forces. A return to open hostilities on the border could affect stability and impact on Chinese’s interests in Burma. In addition to the billions of dollars invested by Chinese state-owned companies in Burma’s oil and gas and hydropower industries and Beijing’s major role in developing trade routes to South and Southeast Asia through the country, Chinese businessmen are involving in a wide array of legal and illegal businesses in Burma, from border trade and jade mining to drug smuggling and human trafficking. This week, officials from both countries held a regular meeting of a Sino-Burmese border committee in Tangyan, near areas controlled by the United Wa State Army, the largest ethnic ceasefire group. The tension over the border guard force issue was reportedly among the subjects discussed, as part of China’s efforts to maintain stability on the border. “Keeping the border area between China and Myanmar [Burma] stable is the most important task for the Chinese government,” the scholar said. “But what Beijing will do if instability occurs is a big secret in China.” He added that Beijing is concerned that the Burmese regime’s handling of the election law issue, which reflects its disregard for international opinion, could also be an indication of how it intends to deal with the ethnic ceasefire groups. |
15 March 2010
News on Burma - 15/3/09
Message from Suu Kyi – Ba Kaung Irrawaddy: Fri 12 Mar 2010 Detained pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi instructed members of the National League for Democracy (NLD) to discuss the party’s Shwegondaing declaration and why the 2008 Constitution is unnacceptable, said her lawyer, Nyan Win, after a two-hour meeting with Suu Kyi on Thursday.“She wants the party members to discuss why the 2008 Constitution is unacceptable because she wants everyone to understand the laws, and she wants everyone to have a thorough understanding of the Shwegondaing declaration,” said Nyan Win, who is also a senior NLD party official. The meeting took place two days after the Burmese military regime promulgated the election laws that bar Suu Kyi as leader of Burma’s main opposition party from organizing and being a member of a political party if she is not released before the polls expected to be held in October. According to Nyan Win, Suu Kyi said the election laws gave her the impression that they targeted an individual. “She said the laws both demeans the dignity of the laws and tarnish the prestige of the country,” he said. “Daw Suu wants to urge everyone, whether NLD members, non-members or ethnic people, to take concerted action against these unjust laws,” Nyan Win said. “She also said all the people should speak up for their own rights with understanding of the laws.” The Shwegoindaing Declaration, released by the National League for Democracy (NLD) in April 2009, calls for a review of the military-drafted Constitution, political dialogue and the unconditional release of all political prisoners, including its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi. The regime has ignored the party’s repeated call for the review of the Constitution and enacted the election laws which analysts said have put the party in a corner. According to the election laws, the party not only needs to forgo its call for a review of the Constitution, which it would do at the risk of losing grace with the Burmese public, but also needs to expel Suu Kyi if she is not released before May 7, the deadline for the registration of all political parties. Suu Kyi is serving an 18-month term of house arrrest. With her sentence due to expire in November, Suu Kyi cannot be a member of any political party if she is not released before May 7, according to the election law that bans prisoners from being members of political parties. If the party fails to register, on the other hand, it will cease to exist as a legal party. Asked how Suu Kyi viewed the prospect of her party’s dissolution if it decides not to expel her, Nyan Win said, “she has not decided on this issue.” Meanwhile, Suu Kyi has sent instructions to NLD leaders to pursue judicial action against these unjust election laws, according to Nyan Win, who declined to disclose the details. “I cannot say what these instructions are now. Party leaders will make decisions based on her instructions,” Nyan Win said, adding that the party leaders’ actions would be “nationwide.” Myanmar moves troops to borders Wall Street Journal: Fri 12 Mar 2010 Yangon—Myanmar’s military is moving large numbers of soldiers to border areas near China and Thailand in anticipation of possible conflicts with ethnic rebels in those areas before elections this year, according to diplomats, intelligence experts and residents who are tracking the activities.Details about the buildup, including the total number of troops involved, are unclear. Myanmar is one of the world’s most secretive countries, and its government rarely speaks publicly about activities it deems sensitive, especially military movements. Attempts to reach the Myanmar government were unsuccessful. But analysts and dissidents say the deployments—which are believed to include tens of thousands of soldiers—are designed to ratchet up pressure on Myanmar’s numerous armed ethnic groups before the regime holds elections later this year. Several of the groups—including the Wa, an ethnic minority with a private army that includes as many as 20,000 soldiers—have yet to indicate whether they will participate and continue to resist any move that would reduce their autonomy. Myanmar’s military is trying to “turn up the pressure” on rebels through the troop deployments, said Bertil Lintner, a Thailand-based military expert who has followed the issue. If tensions continue to build, he said, “I think there will be military action.” The generals “could decide they have to solve” the border problem now because of the election, said one Yangon diplomat. Some analysts believe Myanmar authorities will stop short of launching a full assault to avoid condemnation from neighbors at a time when the regime is trying to boost its international image by holding elections. Thai officials couldn’t be reached Thursday. Previously, Chinese authorities have expressed concern about Myanmar border-area unrest. The buildup comes at a time when the junta is trying to assert tighter control over how its election—the first since 1990—is conducted. On Thursday, it released the latest in a series of new rules for the vote, including provisions that officially invalidated the 1990 election, which was easily won by Myanmar’s main opposition party but ignored by the regime. The government also appointed a former high-ranking army officer to head the commission overseeing the vote, the Associated Press reported. Myanmar has yet to announce a date for the election. Reining in the more than a dozen ethnic rebel groups within Myanmar’s borders remains a priority for the regime. The junta has struggled for decades to subdue the groups, which control large areas along Myanmar’s borders, and it has repeatedly cited that struggle as one of the main reasons to justify its harsh rule over the country, also known as Burma. To ensure the rebels are pacified in time for the vote, regime officials have ordered ethnic groups to convert their soldiers into “border guards” under the leadership of the Myanmar army, sharply limiting their autonomy. In return, the groups would be allowed to organize political groups and participate in the vote. Several groups, including the Wa, have so far declined. In August, the Myanmar military targeted a relatively weak ethnic group, the Kokang, in an offensive that drove some 30,000 or more refugees into China and left more than 30 people dead. Most of the refugees returned when it was clear the Kokang had been overwhelmed. A spokeswoman for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs last year expressed “deep concern” over the Kokang episode, a rare public rebuke from its northern neighbor. A conflict with the Wa or other large ethnic groups would likely be worse, analysts say. The Wa are believed to be far better-armed and better-organized, thanks in part to revenue from drug trafficking, according to U.S. government and international antinarcotics officials. Intelligence experts say ethnic groups have been building up their arms stockpiles, meaning they could present a bigger challenge if the military doesn’t act now. According to Irrawaddy, a Myanmar-focused news organization based in Thailand, the government is moving as many as 70,000 troops into Shan state, a part of northeastern Myanmar occupied in part by Wa and other ethnic minorities. It cited unnamed sources close to military officials working in Myanmar border areas. Residents in some of the areas have reported seeing large numbers of troops on the move, including in a city southeast of Mandalay in central Myanmar with military bases nearby and roads heading east into Wa areas. One resident, a former schoolteacher who lives near the main highway in the region, said trucks of soldiers began moving out at night in late February and continued to leave military installations each night for several days. After that, he said, a new round of convoys began carrying rations eastward. He said he believed the trucks were heading to Kengtung, a town in far eastern Myanmar that’s close to areas populated by the Wa. It was impossible to independently verify his account. Residents in areas further north around Muse, a border crossing with China, report a similar buildup since late February. “More security forces are visible along the Sino-Burmese trade route” from central Myanmar to Muse, said a businessman who imports computers from China. Other businessmen and brokers have said that getting imported items from China into Myanmar cities has become more difficult because of increased military checkpoints. Campbell says engagement with Burma failing Associated Press: Fri 12 Mar 2010 Rangoon — Washington’s new policy of engagement with Burma’s military government appears to be failing, a senior US official indicated Friday, noting the junta’s decision to bar democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi from upcoming elections.This week the government unveiled election laws that prevent the detained Nobel Peace Prize laureate from running for office or even voting in the polls and greatly weaken her National League for Democracy. The date of the elections has not been announced. The United States recently modified its strict policy of isolating the junta in the hope that increased engagement would encourage change. However, the Obama administration has said it will not lift sanctions on Burma unless its sees concrete progress toward democratic reform—notably freeing Suu Kyi and letting her party participate in elections. “The US approach was to try to encourage domestic dialogue between the key stakeholders, and the recent promulgation of the election criteria doesn’t leave much room for such a dialogue,” said U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell. Campbell, speaking to reporters in Bangkok, said the US would continue to talk with all parties inside Burma, including the government. But he added: “We’re very disappointed, and we are concerned. It’s very regrettable. This is not what we had hoped for, and it is a setback.” Campbell is on a 10-country Asian trip. On Friday, the junta unveiled the last of its election laws, which Suu Kyi has described as unjust and repressive. The fifth and last law, carried in state-owned newspapers, governs elections for 14 regional parliaments. Details of the five laws have trickled out over the course of the week. “Aung San Suu Kyi said she never expected such repressive laws would come out but said she’s not disappointed,” her party spokesman Nyan Win told reporters after meeting the 64-year-old democracy leader at her home Thursday. “She said such challenges call for resolute responses and calls on the people and democratic forces to take unanimous action against such unfair laws,” he said. The party has yet to decide whether it will participate in the elections. Political parties have 60 days from Monday to register. It will be the first poll since 1990, when Suu Kyi’s party won a landslide victory. The junta ignored the results of that vote and has kept Suu Kyi jailed or under detention for 14 of the past 20 years. This year’s elections are part of the junta’s “roadmap to democracy,” which critics deride as a sham designed to cement the military’s power. A military-backed constitution was approved by a national referendum last May, but the opposition charges that the vote was unfair. An election law announced Wednesday prohibits anyone convicted of a crime from being a member of a political party, making Suu Kyi ineligible to become a candidate in the elections — or even a member of the party she co-founded and heads. In August, Suu Kyi was convicted of violating the terms of her house arrest by briefly sheltering an American who swam uninvited to her lakeside residence, and was sentenced to 18 more months of detention. Election laws announced Thursday take away her right to vote, saying those convicted of crimes are barred from the polls. Thursday’s two laws also formally invalidated the 1990 election results, saying the 1989 election law under which those polls were held was repealed by the new legislation. “They have been slowly trying to decimate the party and now they are doing it with utmost force. But the NLD will never collapse,” said the party’s deputy chairman, Tin Oo. US-based Human Rights Watch says it believes 429 members of the league are currently imprisoned, including 12 who won parliamentary seats in the 1990 elections. The United States and human rights groups have warned that the junta is running out of chances to make the elections appear credible. Clauses in the constitution already ensure that the military will retain a controlling say in government and bar Suu Kyi from holding office. Burma’s sham elections Independent (UK): Fri 12 Mar 2010 For those harbouring any hopes that the military regime in Burma was moving towards some kind of real democracy, this week’s announcement of the laws for the forthcoming elections must have come as a rude shock. Under the new rules, no one who is a member of religious order or anyone with a criminal conviction can stand.In other words out goes any chance of the pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi – still under house arrest – or any member of the democracy parties now languishing in prison on political charges or any monk, whether they have been involved in past demonstrations or not, from taking part. And if that was not clear enough, the Burmese junta yesterday introduced a law annulling the election of 1990 which Ms Suu Kyi overwhelmingly won and announced a 17-member election commission to oversee the polls headed by a former military officer and stuffed with government cronies. Little wonder that a US official has declared the laws, setting out the principles of an election whose date has still to be announced, a mockery of the democratic process. The clampdown must be particularly galling to the US administration, which has bent over backwards to try and encourage dialogue with the regime and, indeed, for Aung San Suu Kyi herself, who had been let out to meet some members of the regime and had made encouraging noises about the future. The simple reality, however, is that this regime, like any other authoritarian ruler, is unwilling to give up power voluntarily. It will make gestures to get the international community, and Burma’s chief backers in Beijing, off their backs by holding elections and allowing some participation by the National League for Democracy. But it won’t permit anything that truly threatens its own position. Which leaves the rest of the world in a quandary as to how to react. Sanctions haven’t worked. Some sort of dialogue is probably better than total isolation. But what the UN and the international commun ty must not do is to accept these elections as anything other than what they are, namely a total sham. Burma, a land frozen in tyranny – Gideon Rachman Financial Times (UK): Fri 12 Mar 2010 Amid the rash of commemorations celebrating the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall last year, it was easy to feel that 1989 was a year in which freedom advanced everywhere. The Soviet empire collapsed. Two years later the Soviet Union itself disintegrated. A few months after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Nelson Mandela was released. The end of the cold war unfroze deadlocked political situations all over the world.But political freedom did not advance everywhere in 1989. Most obviously that was the year that the Chinese government sent the tanks into Tiananmen Square. And 1989 was also the year that Aung San Suu Kyi was placed under house arrest in Burma. Who would have believed that 21 years later, this heroic woman would still be a political prisoner? At least, 21 years after Tiananmen, China has changed unrecognisably. But Burma is still frozen in time and in tyranny. The depressing sense that nothing at all has changed is reinforced by the latest news that the Burmese military junta has banned Suu Kyi from participating in national elections later this year. So is there any hope of change? Optimists will seize on the fact that Burma is, at least, attempting to hold national elections, the first since the elections of 1990, the results of which were ignored, when it became clear that Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy had won. But this latest poll will not mean much, without the participation of the NLD and its banned leader. The outside world has tried many different approaches. The west has pushed for the isolation of the Burmese government, following the wishes of the democratic opposition. Burma’s Asian neighbours have gone for a policy of engagement, even admitting Burma to the south-east Asian club, Asean. But nothing seems to have worked. Burma remains an anomalous, backward dictatorship inside Asean – more repressive, poorer and more isolated, even than Cambodia or Vietnam. Now, because of the country’s strategic position and mineral resources, Burma is being wooed by China and, more discreetly, by India. At some point, surely, the Burmese military regime will have to crack. But what will it take? Burmese army’s violence against civilians Guardian (UK): Fri 12 Mar 2010 Since 1996, military abuses have forced 1m villagers to flee their homes, according to UN draft report. • Since 1996, up to 1 million people have been displaced. Entire communities have been forced to relocate and their houses and food supplies burned to prevent their return. Those who refuse forced relocations and choose to hide risk military attack.
Myanmar’s Suu Kyi calls for united response to ‘unjust’ law Agence France Presse: Thu 11 Mar 2010 Yangon – Myanmar’s detained pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi Thursday called on her people to respond to an “unjust” election law issued by the junta that bars her from the vote, her lawyer said.Under the laws enacted Monday, which have sparked international anger, Suu Kyi faces exclusion from her own National League for Democracy (NLD) and is prevented from standing in the elections expected in October or November. “The people and political forces have to respond united to such an unjust law,” Suu Kyi said according to her lawyer and NLD spokesman Nyan Win, after he visited the democracy icon, who has been locked up for 14 of the last 20 years. “She didn’t think such a repressive law would come out,” he told AFP, adding that her disposition was “more cheerful” than expected during the meeting. Under the legislation — slammed as a “mockery” by the United States — the Nobel Peace Laureate is not allowed to run in the election on the grounds that she is a serving prisoner. On Thursday Myanmar’s ruling junta also unveiled on state television its handpicked election commission to oversee the polls, leading to criticism from rights groups that the body would not be impartial. It cited an order signed by General Tin Aung Myint Oo, the number five in the junta hierarchy, and named the chairman of the new commission as Thein Soe, without giving further details. The new laws also officially annul the result of Myanmar’s last elections in 1990, which the NLD won by a landslide. The junta never allowed the party to take power. But in a surprise move, authorities permitted the reopening of around 300 NLD offices which were shut after an attack by a pro-junta mob on Suu Kyi’s motorcade in May 2003 which left dozens of people dead. “They have not yet informed our party headquarters but the authorities have informed regional and divisional offices that they can reopen,” Nyan Win said. The new laws give parties just 60 days from Monday to decide whether to register, but the NLD has not yet said if it will do so. Suu Kyi’s house arrest was extended by 18 months in August after she was convicted over an incident in which a US man swam to her home. UN chief Ban Ki-moon Wednesday renewed his appeal to the junta to free the 64-year-old and let her take part in the elections and Britain expressed “regret” over Suu Kyi’s exclusion. The United States, which has imposed heavy sanctions on Myanmar but recently launched a policy of increased engagement with the regime, reacted angrily to the new laws. “The political party registration law makes a mockery of the democratic process and ensures the upcoming election will be devoid of credibility,” US State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said Wednesday. The Philippines on Thursday described the law affecting Suu Kyi as a “farce”, becoming the first member of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to publicly comment. The group includes Myanmar. But China, which has huge investments in neighbouring Myanmar, said the laws were a matter for Myanmar alone. “These are the internal affairs of Myanmar, which need to be properly resolved by the government and people of Myanmar,” said Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang. Analysts said the laws proved that the elections were mainly aimed at legitimising and entrenching the generals’ grip on power and were a “survival strategy”. “Accordingly, it is almost sure that the 2010 elections will not achieve genuine democracy in Myanmar,” Toshihiro Kudo, from the Institute of Developing Economies in China, Japan, said in emailed comments. Myanmar junta annuls election held 20 years ago Reuters: Thu 11 Mar 2010 Yangon – Myanmar’s military government on Thursday officially annulled the results of the country’s 1990 general election, a poll it chose to ignore at the time when the main opposition party won by a landslide.The 1990 polls were declared null and void because they did not comply with a new parliamentary election law enacted this week, the junta said in a statement published in Thursday’s official newspapers. “It must be deemed that the results of the multiparty democracy elections held under that annulled law have also been annulled automatically since they are not consistent with this new law,” it said in the announcement in state media. The National League for Democracy (NLD) party, led by Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, won the 1990 election, taking 392 of the 485 seats in parliament, but it was never allowed to rule. The junta, then known as the State Law and Order Restoration Council, said it would honor the result but refused to allow the NLD to take office until a new constitution was drafted and an investigation conducted into the polls. Myanmar plans to hold an election this year, the first since the 1990 vote, but the process has already been derided by critics as a sham to entrench nearly five decades of military rule in the former British colony. (Reporting by Aung Hla Tun; Writing by Martin Petty; Editing by Alan Raybould and Sugita Katyal) Burma’s election laws amorphous on Diaspora Mizzima News: Thu 11 Mar 2010 The Burmese military junta’s election laws have conveniently failed to address the fundamental issues of millions of Burmese in Diaspora, residing outside the country for years due to political and economic upheaval.“Many migrant workers are concerned about the political situation in their country because that is one of the reasons that they came out as migrant workers,” said Debbie Stothard, Coordinator for Altsean-Burma. “It is very clear that there is not going to be any change to get jobs…so all the economic management and the systematic human rights abuses that forced people to leave Burma are still likely to continue.” The law vaguely mentions that the Foreign Ministry is directed to organize advanced voting for those who live outside the country. Millions of Burmese citizens are living in neighbouring countries such as Thailand, India, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Singapore. In Thailand alone, it is estimated that at least two million Burmese live and work as migrant workers. This is in addition to some 150,000 refugees in camps along the Thai-Burma border region, who have fled Burma due to the ongoing civil war. In India there are an estimated 50,000 odd Burmese in Mizoram State alone living as illegal migrant workers; while Malaysia has more than 150,000 Burmese workers staying legally, with the illegal number of Burmese residents in Malaysia estimated to easily match the legal figure. According to the Parliamentary Election Law (for House of Representatives) announced today, an eligible candidate has to live in the country for a minimum of at least 10 consecutive years in the run-up to the election. Thousands of Burmese pro-democracy activists left Burma in the years following the 1988 popular uprising. The new law also says that the military will hold 25 per cent of parliamentary seats, 110 out of a total 440 in the House of Representatives. Further, the country’s Commander-in-Chief will select and nominate the 110 members to represent the military. And in the Nationalities Parliament, the military is to have 56 out of a total 224 representatives encompassing the 14 States and Divisions of the country. At the same time, the government is prepared to crack down on any anti-election and anti-voting activities under the guise of a clause detailing that anyone who speaks, writes or rallies against voting can be sentenced to a maximum of one year in jail or Kyat 100,000 or both. “I think it is very clear from the election law that the polls are not going to improve the situation in Burma,” Stothard said and added “so the international community has to understand that it is actually unsafe to force refugees and migrant workers back to Burma under such conditions.” Since 1962, when the military took over power by a coup, at least five million Burmese are believed to have sought a better living throughout the world. According to official statistics of 2008, there are nearly 28 million eligible voters in the country of around 55 million people. Estimates from human rights groups working along the border and inside Burma say there are about two million internally displaced persons in Burma, especially in Karen and Shan States. Despite repeated calls by the National League for Democracy to recognize the results of the 1990 elections, Burma’s military regime has now officially annulled the 1990 results through its new election laws. The law for the Parliamentary Election clearly states that the results of the 1990 elections have been canceled as of March 8 this year. Reports circulating inside Burma and abroad say that the regime will hold the 2010 elections on October 10, although the government is yet to announce the official date. Burma’s electoral laws undemocratic: Indian experts Mizzima News: Thu 11 Mar 2010 Indian constitutional experts and election observers have said that Burma’s electoral laws that the junta has started announcing since March 8 through the state controlled media do not follow democratic norms.The laws promulgated by the Burmese government for the elections in 2010, goes against democratic norms and it will not pave the way for democracy. Subash Kashyap, a constitution expert and former Secretary General in the Indian Parliament said: “what is going on in Burma is really a serious matter. What the junta is doing over the last two decades is totally against democratic laws”. Election laws announced by the junta have barred pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi from being a member of a party, from forming a party or contesting the elections. The new law states that anyone serving a prison term cannot be a member of a political party. Aung San Suu Kyi is presently under 18 months house arrest. She was convicted for flouting the terms of her house arrest in August last year after an uninvited American man John Yettaw swam to her house and stayed there for two days. “It is wrong to keep the opposition leader under house arrest. She must be freed to contest elections. Under democratic laws every individual has the right to contest elections. There can be no election if there is no opposition party,” Sanjay Kumar at Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) in New Delhi told Mizzima. Sabya Sachi, a professor and an election observer in Kolkata told Mizzima, “If such laws are made then there will never be peace and democracy in the country.” “Opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi must be set free and should be allowed to campaign. She must be allowed to speak in public, free to meet people and must be allowed to hear public demands,” he added. The junta is implementing its ‘Seven Points Road Map to Democracy’ with the fifth step being the elections this year, after 20 years. In 1990 Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy swept to victory but was refused power. The 2010 elections laws also bar the over 2100 political prisoners to take part in the elections. It reserves 25 per cent of parliamentary seats for the country’s military. “Unless and until Aung San Suu Kyi is released, there will not be free and fair elections, said Subash Kashyap. The 64-year-old Suu Kyi has been in detention for the last 20 years. The new law also gives the NLD just 60 days from March 8 to register as a party if it wants to take part in the elections. With the new laws, NLD will either have to expel its leader Suu Kyi and more than 400 members of the party, who are in jails or face de-registration. Human rights groups have condemned the junta’s electoral laws as “designed to exclude the main opposition party and ensure a victory for the ruling military”. “The new law’s assault on opposition parties is sadly predictable,” said Brad Adams, Asia Director at Human Rights Watch. “It continues the sham political process that is aimed at creating the appearance of civilian rule with a military spine.” Meanwhile, the Secretary General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon has made a statement in New York that the laws “so far suggest that they do not measure up to the international community’s expectations of what is needed for an inclusive political process.” He has called on the Burmese government to ensure a fair, transparent and credible elections and allow Aung San Suu Kyi to freely participate in the polls. New Burma election law ‘a farce’ – Estrella Torres Business Mirror (Philippines): Thu 11 Mar 2010 FOREIGN Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo called the new election law passed by Burma’s military junta as a “farce” as it fails to facilitate the release and participation in the elections of Nobel laureate and peace icon Aung San Suu Kyi.The Philippines’ chief diplomat said Burma’s military junta had committed to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) in 2007 to fulfill its own road map to democracy, which includes the holding of its first inclusive democratic elections and the release of Suu Kyi and the rest of the political prisoners. The Philippines and Burma, renamed by junta leaders as Myanmar, are members of Asean, along with Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Brunei, Cambodia and Laos. “Unless they [referring to Burma’s junta] release Suu Kyi and allow her and her party to participate in the elections, it’s [new election law] a farce and, therefore, contrary to their Road map to Democracy,” said Romulo in a statement on Thursday. Burma’s junta leaders passed the Political Parties Registration Law on March 8. It bans people convicted by a court of law from party membership—which may force Suu Kyi’s expulsion from the National League for Democracy (NLD). Suu Kyi has spent 14 of the past 20 years in self-exile. In August last year, the democracy icon and Nobel Peace laureate was convicted of violating the terms of her house arrest when she sheltered an American who swam to her lakeside residence. Her term of house arrest expires in November. Burma Partnership, a network of rights groups in the Asia-Pacific region pushing for democracy in the military-ruled nation, said the passage of the new election law painted a “dire image” of the elections. The group said the junta has not even announced a date for holding elections that was supposed to be held in May this year. The rights group has identified crucial loopholes in the new election law, which it viewed would still fail to democratize the nation. Burma Partnership pointed out that the election commission formed by the junta to implement the new law will have the authority to convene the election and will exercise “final decision-making power throughout and administer and direct political parties.” “This means that the elections will unfold according to the junta’s wishes,” said Burma Partnership. The group added that most of the key political figures, including Suu Kyi and ethnic leaders, were barred from forming political parties and participating in the elections. The new election law also requires political parties participating in the elections to abide by and protect the 2008 Constitution, which was criticized as undemocratic and fundamentally flawed. The rights network said such provision shows that the regime does not envision the elections and the ensuing government to be a transformative step toward true democracy, but rather a means to maintain power. Burma Partnership believes that Suu Kyi and her colleagues in the NLD may not be able to participate in the elections because most of them have been convicted and are still in detention. The new election law only allows party leaders to register for the upcoming elections within 60 days. U.N. rights envoy seeks Myanmar war crimes inquiry – Stephanie Nebehay Reuters: Thu 11 Mar 2010 Geneva – The United Nations human rights investigator for Myanmar called on Thursday for an international inquiry into possible war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the ruling junta.Tomas Ojea Quintana, U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, said a pattern of gross and systematic violations of fundamental freedoms continued in the country formerly known as Burma which has promised elections this year. “According to consistent reports, the possibility exists that some of these human rights violations may entail categories of crimes against humanity or war crimes under the terms of the statute of the International Criminal Court,” Ojea Quintana said in a 30-page report to the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva. Activist groups welcomed his recommendation, calling it unprecedented since the United Nations established a mandate to look into human rights violations in Myanmar in 1992. Violations included mass arrests of dissidents, deaths and torture of detainees, lack of freedom of assembly, religion and expression, and forced labour, according to the Argentine lawyer who made his third trip to Myanmar last month. As Myanmar had failed to investigate the abuses, “U.N. institutions may consider the possibility to establish a commission of inquiry with a specific fact-finding mandate to address the question of international crimes,” he said. There were indications that the violations were “the result of a state policy that involves authorities in the executive, military and judiciary at all levels,” he said. POLITICAL PRISONERS DOUBLE Ojea Quintana called for the release of 2,100 political prisoners — including monks, students, lawyers, journalists and dissidents — that he said were being detained in Myanmar. They had nearly doubled in number in the past two years. Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, who has been detained for 15 of the past 21 years and was sentenced to a further 18 months of house arrest last August, is among them. He called for the end of her house arrest, saying it violated both international and domestic law, and voiced regret that he was not allowed to visit her on his latest mission. Myanmar’s military government has allowed her National League for Democracy party to reopen regional branch offices that have been closed since May 2003, a party spokesman said in Yangon on Thursday. “The elections cannot be free, fair, transparent and inclusive, in accordance with international standards, without the freedom of expression, opinion, association and assembly,” Ojea Quintana declared. Noting there was still no election date, he said that the delay raised serious doubts about the possibility of providing adequate time for all parties to fairly contest the elections. Dissenting voices are not tolerated in Myanmar and there are at least 12 journalists and many more bloggers in prison, according to the independent investigator. Ojea Quintana voiced concern at reports about an “alarmingly high number of deaths in prison”. Deprivation of food and water, as well as denial of medical care, are used as punishment. Up to 130 political prisoners are said to be in poor health, he said. UN urges Burma to let Aung San Suu Kyi contest polls Agence France Presse: Thu 11 Mar 2010 United Nations – UN chief Ban Ki-moon overnight renewed his appeal to Myanmar rulers to let detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi take part in upcoming polls after new election laws disqualified her.“The Secretary General reiterates his call for the Myanmar authorities to ensure an inclusive political process leading to fair, transparent and credible elections in which all citizens of Myanmar, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, can freely participate,” his office said in a statement. In a law printed for the first time overnight in state newspapers, Myanmar’s military junta said that anyone serving a prison term cannot be a member of a political party. Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) – which won Myanmar’s last elections in 1990 but was stopped from taking power by the junta — would in turn be abolished if it failed to obey the rules. The United Nations said it was carefully studying the new laws, adding: “the indications available so far suggest that they do not measure up to our expectations of what is needed for an inclusive political process.” Myanmar’s Political Parties Registration Act also gives the NLD just 60 days from Monday, when the law was enacted, to register as a party if it wants to take part in the elections, or else face dissolution. The NLD has yet to announce whether it will take part in the polls promised by the junta, which are expected in October or November although the Government has still not set a date. The 64-year-old Suu Kyi has been in detention for 14 of the last 20 years since the previous elections. She was already barred from standing as a candidate under a new constitution approved in a 2008 referendum that stipulates that those married to foreigners are ineligible. Her husband, British academic Michael Aris, died in 1999. The Nobel Peace laureate was sentenced to three years’ jail last August over an incident in which a US man swam to her lakeside home. Suu Kyi’s sentence was commuted by junta supremo Than Shwe to 18 months under house arrest. Belt, braces and army boots Economist: Thu 11 Mar 2010 THE junta ruling Myanmar has had 20 years to digest the lessons from the country’s most recent election. It was trounced by the National League for Democracy, even though the opposition’s charismatic leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, was already under house arrest. This year on an unnamed date (perhaps its astrologers cannot agree) the junta will hold another election. It will not lose this one.Election laws published this week do not quite spell out the result. But a “political-parties registration law” bars Miss Suu Kyi and other political prisoners, of whom there are more than 2,000, from belonging to a party because of their criminal convictions. Cut off from politics by her house arrest, Miss Suu Kyi is anyway barred from office as the widow of a foreigner. Her party now has to expel her and other detainees. The law also bans civil servants from joining parties, along with monks, who led anti-government protests in 2007. The dilemma the opposition faces has become sharper. It has long had to worry about whether to add legitimacy to a sham electoral process by taking part, or risk further marginalisation by boycotting it. Now the League has been allowed to reopen branch offices closed since 2003. But it has 60 days to decide, in effect, between taking part in the election and abolition as a legal party. In 1995 it pulled out of a farcical “national convention” drafting a new constitution. The constitution that emerged in 2008 duly enshrines the role of the army. This time the League may feel compelled to take part, but find that just as ineffectual. The election, nonetheless, does come at a time of some sort of change, if only generational. Than Shwe, the “senior general” (pictured), is 77. He and his comrades are preparing to pass on the baton. Western diplomats hope that, having cut their teeth fighting a Chinese-backed communist insurgency, they are uneasy with Myanmar’s isolation from the West and loth to bequeath their successors a regime so reliant on China. The election, one stop on a “road map” to democracy, in this analysis, is one way of opening up. In another change the junta has started a remarkable if stealthy process of selling state assets: ports, buildings in Yangon vacated by its shift of capital in 2005, petrol stations, telecoms firms and a share in the national airline. This is hardly a gesture to economic reform—the sales are cooked-up deals benefiting junta cronies. But nor does it seem just the desperation of a cash-strapped regime. Rather, in the analysis of Yeni, of Irrawaddy, a magazine published by émigrés in Thailand, it is the “formal transfer of the nation’s wealth into the hands of an entrenched elite”, ahead of an election and the implementation of a new constitution which, in theory, should allow greater competition for assets. This elite is “pre-emptively buying up everything in sight”. It has a similar attitude to competition of the democratic kind. Business as usual in Burma – Simon Tisdall Guardian (UK): Thu 11 Mar 2010 The Burmese junta’s new electoral laws are designed to give the regime a veneer of democratic respectability.A call by a senior UN official for Burma’s military rulers to be investigated for “international crimes”, including crimes against humanity and war crimes perpetrated against Burmese civilians, has ratcheted up pressure on the junta as it finalises much-criticised plans for the country’s first elections in 20 years. The development also casts further doubts on flailing US attempts to engage the regime diplomatically after years of ostracism and sanctions. In a draft report to the UN human rights council published last week, Tomás Ojea Quintana, special rapporteur on human rights in Burma, describes: “A pattern of gross and systematic violation of human rights which has been in place for many years and still continues… There is an indication that those violations are the result of a state policy that involves authorities in the executive, military and judiciary at all levels.” Quintana goes on: “The possibility exists that some of these (violations) may entail categories of crimes against humanity or war crimes under the terms of the statute of the international criminal court.” For this reason, he suggests the UN security council should set up a “commission of inquiry with a specific, fact-finding mandate to address the question of international crimes”. The report, which has yet to be considered by the human rights council, says the forthcoming elections, expected in October, provide an opportunity for positive change. But it is pessimistic the junta will allow the chance to be seized. “During his last mission (in February), the special rapporteur received no indication that all prisoners of conscience will be released, that freedom of opinion and association will be guaranteed in the context of these elections, and that ethnic communities will be able to fully participate.” The pressure group Burma Campaign UK today welcomed what it said was an unprecedented UN call for an inquiry, calling it a “major step forward” that would increase pressure on the US, British and regional governments to adopt a tougher line. Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), led by the jailed Nobel peace prizewinner Aung San Suu Kyi, has repeatedly drawn attention to widespread, ongoing human rights abuses, including the incarceration of 2,000 political prisoners. It also suggests the planned elections will be very far from free or fair. The junta’s unveiling of electoral laws this week has served to strengthen the impression that the polls will be a closely controlled charade designed to give the regime a veneer of democratic respectability. The new rules effectively prevent Suu Kyi and her jailed supporters from standing for election. They establish a government-controlled election oversight body with the power to prevent or annul voting in any part of the country for “security reasons”. And just to be on the safe side, the junta has formally declared the 1990 elections, which the NLD won in a landslide, to be invalid. By allowing the NLD to reopen 100 regional offices offices closed since 2003, the regime is clearly hoping that, despite the restrictions, a decapitated opposition will participate in the poll, thereby boosting its credibility. This has created a dilemma for those NLD leaders who are not in jail. “I think they want us to take part in the election but we still haven’t made up our minds about this,” said spokesman Nyan Win. He described some of the new electoral provisions, such as a requirement that parties uphold the generals’ gerrymandered 2008 constitution, as “completely unacceptable”. External reaction to the junta’s latest machinations has been fierce. The new rules “make a mockery of the democratic process… There’s no hope this election will be credible,” a US state department spokesman said. Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, said he had written to the junta, urging the release of all political prisoners, including Suu Kyi, so they can take part in the polls. Britain has endorsed the demand. But the UN rapporteur’s call for investigations into crimes against humanity and war crimes allegedly perpetrated by junta members potentially raises the long-running Burmese drama to a new level. Having pursued diplomatic contacts with the regime since taking office, the Obama administration came close to admitting this week that its policy of engagement was not working. But what to do? The White House is currently setting human rights and democracy concerns against a top security priority – persuading the generals to curb their military ties with North Korea. The over-riding fear in Washington is that Burma could become another nuclear-armed rogue state. The fear among Burmese activists and thwarted democrats is that they will again be abandoned to their fate, cast as helpless stooges in a cruel election travesty. Regime looks to the law to deal with the NLD – Ko Ko Thet Irrawaddy: Thu 11 Mar 2010 If there is one thing all authoritarian systems have in common it’s their desire to eliminate all forms of dissent. The State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) of Burma is no exception. Having the will as well as the means to crush the organized urban opposition—the most popular of which is the National League for Democracy (NLD)—it is a wonder why the Burmese regime has not done just that. It may be that the SPDC has been weighing its actions against possible reactions. If their actions went out of proportion, there would be perverse consequences. A more viable answer lies in the nature of the conflict that is going on between the two parties. It is well-known that, when faced with clear and present danger such as a mass uprising, the regime spares no effort to crush dissent. But the NLD presents a special case. The war of attrition that is going on between the NLD and the SPDC is mostly of a legalistic nature. The NLD, being a legitimate entity, bent on claiming power via an electoral process, has never gone out of its way. The NLD leader Aung San Suu Kyi also appears to be an ardent proponent of civil disobedience of the type that aims to prove the injustice of an authoritarian system by suffering from its unjust laws. As much as the NLD wishes to undermine the SPDC within the legal framework, the SPDC wishes to do likewise to the NLD. This explains why the NLD leadership controversially opted to remain out of the picture of the Saffron Revolution. This also explains why the SPDC has not outlawed the NLD even though it has often accused the organization of having been directly linked to exiled political groups it consider as enemies. Since the NLD walked out of the constitution-drafting process at the regime-led National Convention in 1993, there has hardly been any indication that the regime would want the NLD back. In fact, there is every indication that the SPDC has been systematically pushing the NLD out of its tolerance limit—out of the legal framework. Being expert at Fabian tactics, the regime found it most expedient to wear the NLD out in a legalistic way. First of all, the SPDC has made a point of making the life of NLD members intolerable. Targeted repression and intimidation of select but grassroots NLD members and their families by the authorities all over the country in the past two decades have been well-documented. Many NLD members simply ceased to become members as they could not sustain their livelihood as long as they are associated with the opposition party. Then came public humiliation and denunciation of the NLD leaders by the SPDC’s mass organization, the Union Solidarity and Development Association (USDA). A series of such measures in the late 1990s was followed by the forced closure of NLD offices in the provinces that aimed to cut the local NLD support for its Rangoon headquarters. Around the same time, the resignation of some of the NLD members who had been forced out of the struggle under duress became regular news in the SPDC papers. It should be noted that, whatever it does to the NLD or others, the SPDC has always managed to find a “legal reason” to justify its actions. More recently, the release of the NLD senior leader Win Tin in September 2008 and Tin Oo in February this year, while keeping key leader Suu Kyi in continued detention incommunicado, is seen as carefully calculated moves to cause a divide in the NLD leadership. Today, what remains of the NLD are tried and tested members, the few but the most formidable. Very few of the groups that are now set to be part of the electoral process can match the NLD when it comes to the sacrifice and political integrity of individual members. So why would the regime want the NLD to be part of its future? The irony of the Burmese regime, which is widely considered to be above the law, is its obsession with law. The election law now provides it with a “lawful reason” to outlaw the NLD or remove Suu Kyi from it. It is definitely easier for the regime to handle Suu Kyi if her party is disbanded or if she lacks legitimate organizational backing. Now the ball is back in the NLD’s court. The party has less than 60 days to decide its future. Whatever the NLD chooses, the change in the nature of the struggle between the SPDC and the NLD will alter the conflict as well as the individuals involved in it. * Ko Ko Thett is a Burma analyst, based in Helsinki. Myanmar junta allows Suu Kyi’s party to reopen branch offices Associated Press: Wed 10 Mar 2010 Yangon – Myanmar’s ruling junta on Wednesday issued permission for detained pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi’s party to reopen its branch offices, a party spokesman said.Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy has opened its 35 township branch offices in Yangon, according to an official source. “Authorities have reopened party branch offices in Yangon and in other districts across the country this evening,” the spokesman said. The action by the junta followed its decision earlier Wednesday to disqualify Suu Kyi from participating in upcoming national elections. The new political parties registration law, announced in state-run newspapers Wednesday, barred electoral participation by members of a political party if they have been convicted in court. The ruling military closed down all offices of Suu Kyi’s NLD in May 2003, following a deadly clash between her followers and the pro-junta mob in central Myanmar. The junta allowed the party’s head office in Yangon to operate in April 2004. But it had continued to close other branch offices across the country. The NLD had been persistently calling for the reopening of its branch offices in the past years while seeking an early release of Suu Kyi and other political prisoners. Western sanctions fuel rare strikes in Myanmar – Aung Hla Tun Reuters: Wed 10 Mar 2010 Yangon – Western sanctions that have decimated Myanmar’s once-thriving garment sector have led to a rare spate of strikes that have unnerved its military rulers, fearful of civil unrest in the run-up to long-awaited elections.Four South Korean-owned factories were brought to a halt for several days last week and another on Monday by sit-in protests by more than 3,000 workers demanding better working conditions and higher pay, demands owners say they cannot meet. They were among 20 garment factories in the commercial capital, Yangon, that have suffered strikes since Feb. 8. “We are doing our best to help the workers and management negotiate and reach an agreement,” a senior Labour Ministry official told Reuters. “The security measures imposed around the factories are not meant to suppress the strikes but just to contain them so that there will not be any infiltration from outside and the strike will not grow into civil unrest,” he added. Strikes and other forms of protests are rare in Myanmar, where small demonstrations over increases in fuel and cooking gas prices in 2007 mushroomed into countrywide marches by Buddhist monks, sparking a crackdown in which at least 31 people died. Analysts and diplomats say the government appears to be especially sensitive to the risk of unrest with elections scheduled for this year under the a seven-step “roadmap to democracy” drawn up by the junta. The workers say their aims are not political. “Our strike was nothing to do with democracy or elections,” said factory worker Khin Kyaw. “None of us wants our factories to close down. If that happens, we workers and our families would be hit worse than our employers.” CRIPPLING SANCTIONS Myanmar’s garment industry has shrunk by an estimated 75 percent since sanctions were imposed in 2001 by the United States, the sector’s biggest market and the main source of the $816 million in revenue generated that year. Trade embargoes led to a sharp fall in the years that followed and the latest figure, for fiscal 2008/09 (April-March), was $292 million. Many Western governments admit sanctions, imposed because of Myanmar’s poor human rights record, have had only a limited impact on the rich ruling generals. Meanwhile, many ordinary citizens are struggling to make ends meet. The Labour Ministry estimates Myanmar had 400 garment factories employing 300,000 workers in 2000, now down to 120 factories and with a combined total of 60,000 staff. There is little hope of business picking up, with increased competition from Bangladesh, Cambodia, Vietnam and Thailand, which are less bureaucratic and offer low costs and cheap labour. Those countries are also entitled to the European Union’s Generalised System of Preferences (GSP), reduced trade tariffs not available to Myanmar because of sanctions on the regime. “The shrinking market has hit us a lot. To make matters worse, we are not entitled to GSP … which can make your profit rise by 11 percent to 17 percent,” Myint Soe, chairman of Myanmar’s Garment Entrepreneurs Association, told Reuters. Monthly salaries of Myanmar garment workers range from 35,000 to 45,000 kyat (about $35 to $45) compared with the $65 monthly minimum wage of their Vietnamese counterparts. Along with hundreds of riot police, the government has dispatched Labour Ministry officials to help negotiate an end to the recent strikes, but factory owners say they have little room to manoeuvre and fear the worst. “If they can agree an increase of 5,000 kyat, it’s okay, we can adjust it,” said one owner, who asked not to be identified. “But if they demand more than that, we won’t break even and our last resort will be to close the factory.” (Writing by Martin Petty; Editing by Alan Raybould and Alex Richardson) Election laws may shut down opposition parties Human Rights Watch: Burma: Thu 11 Mar 2010 New York – Newly issued laws in preparation for 2010 elections in Burma are designed to exclude the main opposition party and ensure a victory for the ruling military, Human Rights Watch said today.The ruling State Peace and Development Council today released the Political Party Registration Law, which includes provisions barring prisoners from being members of political parties. The law effectively excludes more than 2,100 political activists currently imprisoned on politically motivated charges, including Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the opposition National League for Democracy (NLD). Provisions included in the law instruct any party wishing to register to expel members currently serving prison terms. A party that fails to do so will lose its registration and be unable to contest the elections. “The new law’s assault on opposition parties is sadly predictable,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “It continues the sham political process that is aimed at creating the appearance of civilian rule with a military spine.” Yesterday the military government released the first of five laws in preparation for long promised polls in 2010, whose official date has yet to be announced. The Political Party Registration Law states that, “A prisoner may not be a member of a political party.” The law also requires existing political parties, such as the NLD, which won the 1990 elections, re-register within 60 days of March 10. Human Rights Watch believes that there are 429 members of the NLD currently imprisoned, including 12 members elected to parliament in 1990. Aung San Suu Kyi will be effectively barred because she is currently serving a term of house arrest following her conviction in 2009 on politically motivated charges of permitting an intruder into her house in Rangoon while she was under house arrest imposed since 2003. Human Rights Watch is calling for the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners in Burma through its 2,100 in 2010: Free Burma’s Political Prisoners campaign. “The law requires the NLD to choose between participating in the elections and keeping its leader and hundreds of its unjustly imprisoned members,” said Adams. “This is a choice that no political party should have to make and is a transparent attempt to knock the main opposition party out of the running.” Other laws reportedly to be released this week include provisions for the upper and lower houses of parliament and the 14 regional parliaments as outlined in the 2008 constitution. The release of the laws is the penultimate step in the military government’s long drawn out “Road Map to Disciplined Democracy,” a repressive process that has seen political parties deregistered and in some cases outlawed, and thousands of activists sent to prison. The NLD overwhelmingly won the last elections held in Burma in 1990 with more than 80 percent of the seats and 60 percent of the popular vote. The ruling junta ignored the result and announced plans to write a new constitution, which began in 1993 and only concluded in September 2007. The new constitution, released in 2008 and endorsed by an implausible 92 percent of the population in an orchestrated referendum in May 2008, grants sweeping powers to the military. These include one-quarter of lower house seats and one-third of upper house seats in the parliament reserved for serving military officers, as well as immunity for military personnel from civilian prosecution and the reservation of key ministerial portfolios to serving military officers. The United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has called for “the release of all political prisoners, including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and their free participation in the political life of their country; the commencement of dialogue between the Government and opposition and ethnic stakeholders as a necessary part of any national reconciliation process; and the creation of conditions conducive to credible and legitimate elections.” Close allies of Burma, including China, have called for an inclusive political process. “Any optimism that these elections will usher in a period of change in Burma is cynically misplaced,” Adams said. “The Burmese government is demonstrating contempt for the democratic process, the people of Burma, and international opinion, including its friends in China, India, and ASEAN, who have asked for an inclusive political process.” The election law: Not so free and fair – Aung Zaw Irrawaddy: Wed 10 Mar 2010 Burma’s long awaited election law has been published in state controlled newspapers but failed to create much excitement. Unsurprisingly, no date for the election was set, although the regime has promised to hold it sometime this year.As anticipated, the election law will prevent the main opposition party and winner of the 1990 election, the National League for Democracy (NLD), and its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, from participating in the election. It’s also feared that the party registration law set a deadline for the NLD leaders, who haven’t yet decided whether to take part and are still urging the regime to agree to a review of the Constitution. The law excludes electoral participation by members of a political party if they have been convicted in court. Suu Kyi is classed as a “a convicted criminal” for breaching her house arrest after American swimmer John Yettaw briefly stayed at her lakeside house last year. However, knowing that she will be prevented from taking part in the election or from playing a role in future politics in Burma, Suu Kyi recently told her lawyers that the election won’t be free and fair, since there is no freedom of information in the country. A number of dissidents inside and outside Burma have dismissed the election from the start and are urging a boycott of the polls. The NLD’s delay in reaching a decision is perhaps a wise move, but the clock is ticking and there’s no more room for bargaining. It has 60 days from the enactment of the regime’s election law in which to decide whether or not to accept the terms of the party registration laws set by the regime. If it fails to apply for registration within that time the NLD will automatically cease to exist as a legal entity. State-run newspapers also carried details of the Union Election Commission Law under which the regime would select members of the election commission to supervise polling and the political parties. The regime will appoint as members of the election commission “persons which it views as distinguished and reputable.” No matter how “distinguished” and “reputable” they are, the selection process will have little credibility and integrity since the regime will handpick commission members. The five-member commission will have the final say over the country’s first election in two decades, with responsibility for designating constituencies, compiling voter lists and “supervising political parties to perform in accordance with the law.” Suu Kyi’s participation in the election is now out of the question. Even if the election law had not effectively excluded her, she is unlikely to be free when the election is held. Burma’s Home Affairs Minister recently said that the Nobel Peace Laureate could be freed in November—one month after the October date being tipped for the election. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has urged the regime to free all political prisoners, including Suu Kyi, to enable them to participate in the election. “That would make the elections inclusive and credible,” he said in New York. But Ban’s appeal falls on deaf ears in Naypyidaw. “If God himself came down and pleaded with the generals they wouldn’t heed him either,” joke many Burmese. The US has expressed its concern and doubts about the election: “We are concerned by the Burmese authorities’ unilateral decision to begin releasing the election laws without first engaging in substantive dialogue with the democratic opposition or ethnic minority leaders,” said US Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs P. J. Crowley. While the election uncertainty continues, tension increases in the far north, along the Sino-Burmese border, where another deadline has passed for armed ceasefire groups to join the controversial Border Guard Force (BGF). Government forces have tightened security along the Sino-Burmese trade routes following expiry of the deadline on Sunday. Reporters for The Irrawaddy who traveled to the border region saw evidence of increased military security along the road connecting Lashio and Muse in northern Shan State. The military command has also reportedly ordered tanks and other armor to the Kachin State capital, Myitkyina. For nearly one year, the regime has been pressing ethnic armed groups to turn their armies into a border guard force, the BGF, under government command. So far, only the New Democratic Army—Kachin and one Karenni group have indicated their readiness to comply. Other groups, including the United Wa State Army (UWSA) and the Kachin Independence Army (KIA), oppose the BGF proposal but are engaged in negotiations with the regime. It will be interesting to see how a government now engaged in election preparations handles the standoff over its BGF proposal. It’s feared that fighting could break out again in the north or that the regime might employ divide and rule tactics to create splits within ethnic armies. The regime has no shortage of options—including outlawing the largest ethnic armed group, the United Wa State Army (UWSA) and its political wing the United Wa State Party (UWSP), if they fail soon to agree to the BGF plan. Like Suu Kyi and many other prominent political leaders and activists who have spent time in prison, the ethnic groups have little say in the planned election. For that reason alone, the election will be far from free, fair and inclusive. * Aung Zaw is founder and editor of the Irrawaddy magazine. Election commission law in English (Unofficial translation) Mizzima News: Wed 10 Mar 2010 The following is the unofficial translation of the Election Commission Law by the Burmese regime dated 8 March 2010. Though the junta published the election commission law in Burmese in state-run newspapers, no English version has been published so far. Mizzima translates it. Union Election Commission Law Burma rulers to ‘hand-pick’ election commission – Rachel Harvey BBC News: Tue 9 Mar 2010 Bangkok – The first details of Burma’s newly enacted election laws have been published in state-controlled media.Burma’s military government announced on Monday that the long awaited laws had been passed – a crucial step. No date for the poll has been set, but the ruling generals have promised that it will be sometime this year. Critics say the elections, the first to be held in Burma for 20 years, will be a sham designed to entrench the military’s grip on power. There are five election laws in total and so far the details of the first, concerning the election commission, have been made public. Integrity There are few surprises and little comfort for pro-democracy campaigners. The commission itself will be hand-picked by the current military government, and its decisions will be final. Each member of the election body must be at least 50 years old, be deemed by the ruling generals to be a person of integrity, and not a member of any political party. Critics fear that in effect, that means the election commission will be staffed by military loyalists. The details of four more laws will be published in the coming days. They focus on the two new houses of parliament, the polls for regional and state elections and the registration of political parties. The details of the new laws will be carefully scrutinised for any sign that Burma’s first election for two decades could be more transparent and representative than many fear. The United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon recently wrote to the head of the Burmese military government to express his concern about the credibility of the vote and the process leading up to it. NLD will stick with Shwegondaing Declaration, says Win Tin – Phanida Mizzima News: Tue 9 Mar 2010 Chiang Mai – Win Tin, senior leader of Burma’s main opposition party the National League for Democracy told Mizzima today that although Burma’s military government has begun issuing laws concerning this year’s national election, his party will maintain its stand that the regime must recognize that the NLD won Burma’s last election. “The result of the 1990 election must be recognized. That was one of the resolutions from the Shwegondaing Declaration. The result has to be recognized by one way or another. Our political stand and demand is the same as mentioned in the declaration”, said Win Tin who is also a member of NLD’s Central Executive Committee. wintin-nld-party1 The Shwegondaing Declaration issued by the NLD on the 29th April 2009 demands that the Burmese military regime release all political prisoners, recognize the results of the 1990 election, review the 2008 constitution and begin dialogue with NLD party leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Burma’s ruling military regime ignored the NLD’s demands and instead is moving forward with this year’s planned election. Today the regime issued a potentially restrictive Election Commission law that would severely limit the ability of main opposition party NLD to participate in elections. The regime has also indicated that over the next few days they will issue more election related laws. The law for the election commission also abolished the previous election commission that oversaw the 1990 elections. Win Tin maintains that the result of the 1990 election, in which the NLD won 392 parliamentary seats out of a total of 485 seats, is not changed by the new law. According to Win Tin, the NLD will decide whether or not to take part in this year’s election if the military regime recognizes the result of the 1990 election. Win Tin, now 81-years old was released in September 2008 after serving 19 years in prison, much of the time spent in solitary confinement. According to Thailand based Assistance Association for Political Prisoners – Burma (AAPPB), there are more than 2100 political prisoners presently jailed in Burma, including more than 430 members of Win Tin’s NLD. Mizzima has received an advanced copy of the law for the registration of political parties that will likely be released tomorrow. The law bans anyone serving in jail from forming political parties or even becoming a member of a political party. This clause effectively bars a large number of the regime’s political opponents. The party registration law also stipulates that national party must have at least 1000 members and 15 founding members. Regional Parties must have at least 500 members. Under the law a political party must be registered with the election commission within 60 days of the March 8 national election commission law’s official proclamation. A party also must contest at least three parliamentary seats in order to avoid de-registration. Dr Tuja, leader of the Kachin State Progressive Party, which has agreed to take part in the 2010 election, believes that when the Burmese government issued a new Election Commission law the results of the 1990 election were automatically voided. “This newly promulgated law for Election Commission has abolished the SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council)’s Election Commission that was promulgated in 1988. It automatically abolishes the NLD’s demand to recognize the 1990 election result”, Dr Tuja told Mizzima. Others observers strongly disagree, Naing Tin Aung from the Mon Democracy Party, argues that irrespective of the new election laws the Burmese military government needs to release all political prisoners and amend the 2008 constitution. “We will consider whether to participate in the elections or not only after necessary preparations are met. An election can be held only after the constitution is amended based on democratic norms. A majority of people do not accept the constitution in its present form”, he told Mizzima in a phone interview. The new constitution which guarantees a permanent role for the military in national affairs was approved by what many agree was a sham referendum held just a few days after Cyclone Nargis hit Burma’s delta areas and Rangoon in May 2008. Independent observers and political opponents of the regime widely criticized the constitution as “undemocratic” because it ensures that 25 % of the seats in parliament are reserved for military personnel appointed by the military’s supreme commander. The constitution also contains a clause that would prevent Aung San Suu Kyi from serving in government because she was married to a foreigner. Border conflict could last ‘many more years,’ TBBC warns – Saw Yan Naing Irrawaddy: Tue 9 Mar 2010 The Burmese Constitution’s failure to address “ethnic aspirations” could mean that conflict in the border areas would continue for “many more years to come,” according to the Thailand Burma Border Consortium (TBBC).In its latest report, the humanitarian agency—which oversees aid for nine refugee camps along the Thai-Burmese border—said the conflict had become a “peripheral issue” because of the international attention now commanded by the 2010 election. “Whilst everyone hopes that the general election will indeed lead to meaningful change, the new constitution does not address ethnic aspirations and conflict could go on for many more years to come,” the report said. “There was a danger that ethnic conflict in the border areas, remote from Rangoon, might increasingly become the ’side-show.’” the report added. It warned that a “major emergency” was possible if the Burmese regime decided to “push for an early military solution.” The TBBC report said last year had been a difficult one for the organization, which works with a tight budget to care for hundreds of thousands of Burmese refugees and internally displaced people. This year’s operating budget amounts to 1,230 million baht (US $37 million). According to relief groups in Burma’s Karen State, recent military action by government troops and the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army in Taungoo and Papun District had caused more than 2,000 Karen villages to flee and hide in the jungle. The government troops are from Light Infantry Battalions 421, 427, 434, 702 and 704, 434. They were accused by the Committee for Internally Displaced Karen People of attacking villages with mortars and killing civilians. Vietnam bank to open branch in Myanmar Deustche Presse-Agentur: Wed 10 Mar 2010 Hanoi – The Bank for Investment and Development of Vietnam has received state approval to open a branch in Myanmar, local media reported Wednesday.The Voice of Vietnam’s website reported the bank had been given the go-ahead to open a branch in Yangon, Myanmar’s largest city, by Vietnam’s State Bank Tuesday. The country has been broadening its trade ties with Myanmar in recent months. The agriculture newspaper Nong Nghiep reported Tuesday that Vietnam is to grow 200,000 hectares of rubber trees on plantations in Myanmar. The agreement was reportedly sealed when Agriculture Minister Cao Duc Phat visited Myanmar last week. In February, Vietnam Airlines started direct flights between Hanoi and Yangon. That followed a visit by Deputy Foreign Minister Doan Xuan Huong to Myanmar in January, during which he pledged to increase commercial ties. Bilateral trade between the two countries reached 60 million dollars in the first nine months of 2009. Iran and Myanmar to expand multilateral cooperation Iran Student News Agency: Tue 9 Mar 2010 Tehran – Iran’s Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki and Myanmar’s Deputy Foreign Minister met and conferred on the expansion of political, commercial and cultural interrelations.Meeting Boomang Myth, Mottaki emphasized on more functional cooperation and said, joint economic commission, tourism and fundamental agreements for common investment are steps to take for improving of the level of interrelations. Iran and Myanmar are to expand bilateral relations on different fields including energy, oil, gas, and agricultural products as well as technical, scientific and academic cooperation. Deputy of Myanmar’s Foreign Minister, on his part, expressed Myanmar’s will to expand political, commercial and cultural cooperation with Iran. Narco report on Burma Voice of America: Tue 9 Mar 2010 According to the 2010 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, Burma is the world’s second largest producer of illicit opium.According to the 2010 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, Burma is the world’s second largest producer of illicit opium. Eradication efforts and implementation of poppy-free zones by hill tribe growers reduced cultivation levels dramatically between 1998 and 2006. But in 2007, a significant resurgence of cultivation occurred and in 2008, the upward trend in cultivation and production continued. The overall decline in poppy cultivation in Burma since 1996 has been accompanied by a sharp increase in the local production and export of synthetic drugs. Opium, heroin, and amphetamine-type substances are produced predominantly in the border regions of Shan State and in areas controlled by ethnic minority groups. The International Narcotics Control Strategy Report notes that Burmese law enforcement officials have achieved successes in 2009. Seizures are up, including nearly thirteen-fold increase in the seizure of methamphetamine tablets and sharp upward spikes in the amounts of precursor chemical seized. In order for the reduction in poppy cultivation to be sustainable, a true opium replacement strategy must combine a range of counternarcotics actions, including crop eradication and effective law enforcement alternative development options, support for former poppy farmers, and openness to outside assistance. To reach its goals of eradicating all narcotics production and trafficking by 2014, the Burmese government must seek to cooperate closely with the ethnic groups currently involved in drug production and trafficking. The International Narcotics Control Strategy Report also calls on Burma to consider effective new steps to address the explosion of amphetamine-type substances and production and trafficking from Burmese territory by gaining closer cooperation from ethnic groups. Increased international assistance could complement Burma’s efforts in reducing drug production and trafficking in Burma. But direct provision of assistance to the Burmese government by many donors, including the United States, is contingent on meaningful democratic change. The U.S. suspended direct counternarcotics assistance to Burma in 1988 when the military overturned the democratic election of the National League for Democracy. Now is the time for the military regime of Burma to respect the voice of its people and allow a democratic transition to begin. Ramos-Horta launches Burma petition – Simon Roughneen Irrawaddy: Tue 9 Mar 2010 Timor-Leste President Jose Ramos-Horta has launched a worldwide petition for democracy in Burma, which also calls for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi ahead of the election due sometime in 2010.Speaking at Bradford University in the UK, as part of the university’s PeaceJam event, Nobel Peace Prize laureat Ramos-Horta said that Burma’s political divisions should be resolved by dialogue between all relevant parties and not through sanctions that penalize the people of the country. President Jose Ramos-Horta (Photo: www.news.com.au) His comments come after a recent controversy in which the Timor-Leste ambassador to the UN was apparently fired after voting in favour of a General Assembly resolution condemning the human rights situation in Burma. Speaking to The Irrawaddy last month, Timorese Foreign Minister Zacarias da Costa said that the ambassador was replaced as his term of office had expired, an account disputed by Timor-Leste’s main opposition party, Fretilin. Timor-Leste is currently seeking Asean membership, with a view to 2012 accession. All 10 Asean member-states, including Burma, would have to agree. Ramos-Horta has in the past been an outspoken critic of the military government in Napyidaw. No Asean member-states voted in favor of a December 2009 resolution condemning rights abuses in Burma. The Timorese president is currently in Ireland on the second leg of a four-country tour that takes him to Switzerland and Japan next week. He will address the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva on March 13. This comes two days before UN Special Rapporteur on Burma Tomas Ojea Quintana presents his third report on the human rights situation in the country, after his February visit. Ramos-Horta survived an apparent assassination attempt in 2008, the details of which remain a mystery. Last week, courts in Dili sentenced rebels to prison for their role in the attacks on Ramos-Horta and Timor-Leste Prime Minister Xanana Gusmao. However Marcelo Caetano, who was accused of shooting the president twice in the back, was found innocent, after Australian police evidence suggested that the bullet fragments taken from Ramos-Horta’s back during surgery in Australia did not come from Caetano’s gun. On Wednesday, hours before the verdict, Ramos-Horta said that he thought Caetano had shot him. Maj. Alfredo Reinado, the rebel leader implicated in the plot to kill Ramos-Horta and Gusmao, was gunned down at the scene. However, the Dili court found that claims by presidential guard Francisco Lino Marcal that he shot Reinado from a distance were false, with forensic pathologist Muhammad Nurul Islam concluding he was shot at close range, suggesting an execution. The verdict also exonerated Reinados’ girlfriend, Angelita Pires, who had been vilified as a Lady Macbeth type-figure by many in the Timorese political elite, since the attacks on the president and prime minister. Authorities persecute political opponents ahead of announced election Asian Human Rights Commission: Tue 9 Mar 2010 While the military regime in Burma has iterated that it will hold a general election for a new legislature before the end of 2010, government officials have been relentlessly pursuing, intimidating and imprisoning political opponents. In recent weeks the Asian Human Rights Commission has issued appeals on a number of such cases, including the sentencing of a journalist to 13 years in jail for non-existent video footage; the detention, torture and evidence-free trial of 11 people; and the imprisonment of another nine on confessions obtained through use of torture.The imprisonment of opponents rightly attracts widespread concern and condemnation abroad. But the authorities in Burma have a range of other legal and extra-legal measures at their disposal to persecute dissidents and their families beyond the jail walls. A case in point is the recent auctioning of seized property owned by the family of one detainee, Daw Win Mya Mya, in Mandalay. In 2008 the AHRC issued an appeal on the imprisonment of Daw Win Mya Mya and four other persons for allegedly having participated in a meeting of the National League for Democracy during September 2007 where according to the police the speeches were aimed at causing public unrest (AHRC-UAC-246-2008). Win Mya Mya is currently serving her sentence for these so-called crimes. Meanwhile, some months before her arrest in 2007 the Mandalay municipality seized the market stall owned by Win Mya Mya’s family because of two small NLD stickers on one side of the premises. This February 17, it sold the stall at auction, despite repeated requests from the family to senior officials for the stall to be returned to them as the family income depends upon it. The family has also been unable to rent any other place with which to continue their business. The persecuting of the family in this case speaks to the extent to which the authorities in Burma are prepared to exercise their coercive powers through a range of sanctions aimed not only at defeating the fundamental rights of political opponents through denial of fair trial and imprisonment but also comprehensively demolishing their social status and economic capacity. It is also indicative of the pathetic conditions of a family victimized by officials in Burma, whose only possibility for redress is feudalistic: to approach senior army officers and beg that they not be punished for some perceived offence. This method of making a complaint and seeking satisfaction for wrongs committed belongs to the 18th century, not the 21st. All this is while the military leadership has said that a general election for a new parliament will be held before the end of the year. Even though some persons inside and outside the country have expressed hope that the vote will mark a turning point in the long decades of army control over government in Burma, cases of this sort are indicative of how authorities at all levels are continuing with business as usual, and the extent to which the state’s coercive apparatus will continue operating according to its own logic and the objectives of its agents irrespective of what goes on upon the national political stage. As the year passes and the ballot approaches, it will be beholden on persons and organisations concerned with human rights in Burma to continue to document, narrate and protest against such methods of persecuting political opponents, clearly and unequivocally. In this way, we can express concern and solidarity not only for the persons victimised, like Daw Win Mya Mya’s family, but also can paint a clearer picture of how the infrastructure of state in Burma has been evolved over the past half-century to suppress dissent and harass dissenters, and how it will continue to do so into the foreseeable future. * The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984. ‘Bless you Mr. Obama’ on Myanmar – Stanley A Weiss Asia Times: Tue 9 Mar 2010 Mandalay – In September 1952, Russian dictator Joseph Stalin and Chinese foreign minister Chou Enlai convened an extraordinary meeting to discuss the future of Southeast Asia. As recorded in the book, Mao: The Unknown Story, Chou talked about the region “as if its fate were to be entirely decided by Peking”.He explained that China’s strategy was to “exert peaceful influence without sending armed forces”, offering up the examples of Burma (Myanmar) and Tibet. Stalin wryly replied, “Tibet is part of China – there must be Chinese troops deployed. As for Burma, you should proceed carefully.” Then, he confirmed, “It would be good if there was a pro-China government in Burma.” Nearly 60 years later, it is striking how well Chou’s hopes have been realized. Chinese influence can be seen everywhere across the Southeast Asian nation. Locals quip that Mandalay, once home to Burmese kings, should now be renamed the “Capital of Yunnan”, China’s nearest province. In this city made famous for its white marble carvings, it is telling that 80% of all new orders are not to carve Myanmar-style statues, but rather Chinese-style Buddhas. Less obvious is the Chinese presence in the remote northern regions, often hidden from Western eyes. The fabled jade mines of Kachin State, off-limits to most foreigners, host thousands of Chinese miners who send jade directly to China. Not far away, an environmentally damaging hydroelectric plant has been built by China, as one prominent business owner told this writer, “to cloak huge illegal clear-felling of forests by the Chinese”. Timber is moved along two highways that run directly from Myanmar to China, constructed in secret since 2004. “The educated people of [Myanmar] know that China is looting their country of valuable resources and giving nothing in return,” a long-time Western observer of the country said. “They would love to have an alternative trading partner.” But the West, through economic boycotts and sanctions, “has basically dealt itself out of the game”, says Thant Myint-U, grandson of former United Nations secretary general U Thant. China has rushed to fill the void with billions in aid and weapons sales to Myanmar’s junta, which has ruled under different generals since 1962. But increasingly the feeling here is that the days must end for the United States treating Myanmar as a “boutique” issue (as one Barack Obama surrogate memorably said during the 2008 US presidential campaign) focused solely on human rights and the fate of Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi. Three recent developments have shined a spotlight on US security interests in Myanmar, which sits significantly at the crossroads between China and India. Strategic concerns First, there is a pipeline. In November, China announced it was constructing a 675-kilometer (480-mile) oil pipeline from China through Myanmar to the Indian Ocean. As the world’s second-largest oil user, China has long faced the “Malacca Strait dilemma” – that 80% of its oil flows through the narrow strait between Malaysia and Indonesia which a hostile power could choke off in a conflict. The new pipeline will help China avoid the Malacca Strait and give it access to the Indian Ocean. Its a move that US ally India clearly fears. New Delhi announced days after China revealed the plan that it would add 40 warships and new fighter jets to its Indian Ocean arsenal. It is a potential flashpoint the US does not need. Second, there are Myanmar’s nuclear ambitions. In 2002, the junta confirmed plans to build a nuclear research reactor with Russian support. Army officers have since undergone training in Moscow. Recent reports about a stealth deal between Myanmar and North Korea to develop underground nuclear facilities have led some to dub Myanmar “the next North Korea”. “The nuclear issue,” Myanmar scholar Morten Pedersen says, “must be weighing heavy on minds in Washington – and must be addressed.” Third, there is the spread of radical Islam in neighboring Bangladesh, where the “astronomical growth of Islamists in the military”, as scholar Sajeeb Wajed Joy has written, has leapt from 5% in 2001 to 35% today. As crackdowns against journalists and political opponents in Dhaka increase, the last thing the world needs is for Myanmar to become a Pakistan on the Irrawaddy that allows terrorist groups sanctuary in its remote northern regions. The Obama administration has sought to begin a new conversation with Myanmar, conducting the highest-level talks with the generals in more than a decade. But aside from Senator James Webb – who visited Myanmar in 2009 – the US Congress is not listening. “It’s the usual congress full of ignorants, arrogants and self-righteous fools,” says Ma Thanegi, who spent three years in prison after working as Suu Kyi’s assistant. “Their tactics are helping to starve our people. Bless you, Mr Obama.” Myanmar’s parliamentary election scheduled for this year – the first since 1990 – is an opportunity, as Pedersen says, “to change the overall thrust of US policy, to broaden its agenda in [Myanmar] to include peace-building and economic reform.” It is, adds Myanmar expert Robert Taylor, “a chance for the US to counter-balance the growing power of China in Asia and the world.” * Stanley A Weiss is the founding chairman of Business Executives for National Security (BENS), Washington, DC. CSW & Burma Info return from Thailand-Burma border with fresh evidence of crimes against humanity Christian Solidarity Worldwide and Burma Info: Tue 9 Mar 2010 A Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW) and BurmaInfo (Japan) team returned from a fact-finding visit to the Thai-Burmese border last week with fresh evidence of gross human rights violations in eastern Burma that amount to “crimes against humanity”.The delegation, which included CSW’s East Asia Team Leader, Benedict Rogers, and the Director of BurmaInfo, Yuki Akimoto, interviewed new refugees in camps along the Thai-Burma border, and heard first-hand accounts of forced labour, torture and murder. They also visited one of the two temporary camps in Tha Song Yang, where Karen refugees who fled attacks last year were recently under intense pressure from the Thai military to return to Burma, even though their areas are full of landmines and are occupied by the Burma Army and its militias. CSW and BurmaInfo visited the camp ten days after the Thai authorities attempted to forcibly deport refugees. Three families were sent back against their will before NGOs arrived and halted the process. The delegation interviewed two of these families, who are now in hiding in Thailand. Reports detailing the findings of the visit were released today by CSW and BurmaInfo. The words of one refugee who lost both legs after stepping on a landmine sum up the decades of suffering endured by the Karen: “I had to flee … many times. I did portering for the [Burma Army] many times … Run and run and run until now – this is my life.” CSW’s East Asia Team Leader, Benedict Rogers, said: “The testimonies we heard on this visit were harrowing and shocking. The military regime is continuing to perpetrate war crimes and crimes against humanity, even as it prepares to hold sham elections this year. The harassment of frightened, traumatized and extremely vulnerable refugees by the Thai military, forcing them or intimidating them to return to Karen State even though they would be walking into a death trap, adds further misery to an already tragic situation. The international community, and particularly the United Nations, must act now, to impose a universal arms embargo on Burma’s military regime, and hold a commission of inquiry to investigate crimes against humanity and war crimes. The regime’s brutal reign of terror must not be allowed to continue with impunity.” Yuki Akimoto from BurmaInfo (Japan) added: “The international community, including Japan, should not underestimate the negative impact that the violent and volatile situation in eastern Burma could have on the country’s political process. There can be no “free and fair” elections as long as hundreds of thousands of people are displaced internally, or are afraid to go back to Burma because of conflict and militarization.” For a copy of the report or to arrange interviews please contact: Theresa Malinowska, Press Officer at Christian Solidarity Worldwide to arrange on +44 (0)20 8329 0045 / +44 (0)78 2332 9663, email theresamalinowska@csw.org.uk or visit www.csw.org.uk CSW is a human rights organisation which specialises in religious freedom, works on behalf of those persecuted for their Christian beliefs and promotes religious liberty for all. Contact: Yuki Akimoto at BurmaInfo, in Tokyo, Phone: +81 (80) 2006 0165, Email: yuki@burmainfo.org , www.burmainfo.org Myanmar’s ruling junta is selling state’s assets New York Times: Mon 8 Mar 2010 Yangon, Myanmar — Myanmar’s military government has quietly begun the largest sell-off of state assets in the country’s history, including more than 100 government buildings, port facilities and a large stake in the national airline, diplomats and businessmen here say.The sell-off, analysts say, appears to be part of a political transition as the government introduces elections for the first time in 20 years and a new Constitution under which the military seems likely to perpetuate its rule, though more from behind the scenes. Diplomats and businessmen say that the sales may allow ruling generals to build up cash for election campaigns to the new Parliament, where they will hold 25 percent of seats, or to pay for salary increases for civil servants and other populist measures. Many of the assets are being sold to businessmen allied with the military, reinforcing the strength of a class of oligarchs and military cronies. But the privatizations could also have the effect of injecting some competition into what is an almost Soviet-style economic system, and some analysts here say they may herald a shift in direction. Reformers in the government, they say, may be hoping to follow a path similar to that of China or Vietnam, where the economies have been liberalized but the ruling party has remained firmly in charge and has tolerated little dissent. Myanmar’s military junta nationalized most industries when it took power in a 1962 coup and has controlled the lion’s share of the economy since. For years, Myanmar shunned the path of its thriving neighbors. Most major industries, like the telecommunications business, power plants, fuel distribution and health care, remained in the hands of the state. But today the sell-off of assets is so sweeping that some analysts compare it to the widespread privatizations in Russia after the Communist era. “There’s something of a grab going on,” said one diplomat who declined to be identified because he wanted to avoid publicly criticizing the junta. “There’s a sense that it may not be done for the right reasons, but it could have a beneficial effect.” The assets being sold include the country’s fuel import and distribution network, gem and tin mines, farmland, and factories, according to businessmen who have seen announcements of the sales. Most of the announcements have been made to small groups of businessmen and then spread by word of mouth. The government has put out word that it is selling factories producing soft drinks, cigarettes and bicycles, among other commercial goods, according to U Phone Win, the head of a nonprofit organization that assists people in rural areas. It is also opening the health care and education sectors to private enterprise, Mr. Phone Win said, issuing licenses for the first time for private hospitals and schools. “There are opportunities here for the international business community,” he said. For a people accustomed to more gradual change under military rule, the scale of the sales is raising apprehension that it will strengthen the hand of military cronies. One businessman in particular, U Tay Za, owns an airline and a soccer team and has interests in the teak, tourism, telecommunications and construction businesses. He has now been appointed the head of a new petroleum association and appears to be expanding his holdings. In recent days, the country’s Privatization Commission produced a list of 176 assets in Yangon, the main city, to be auctioned off sometime over the next few weeks. The 18-page list, which was shown to prospective buyers, includes a wide-ranging roster of buildings in Yangon worth hundreds of millions of dollars. The list, which covers only part of the privatization plan, features many former government offices, notably the lakeside office of the attorney general, the national archives, the auditor general’s headquarters, the archaeology department and the Ministry of Industry. The buildings were abandoned when the capital was moved to the more remote location of Naypyidaw in 2005, and their sale would seem to ensure that the move was irreversible. The businessman said it was likely that dozens of colonial-era buildings would be torn down. “I feel like I’m bleeding,” he said. The businessman said the military had compiled a separate list of assets for auction that he had not seen; other buildings may also be auctioned independently, he said. Although most of the major sales have not been mentioned in the state-run media here, residents are already feeling the effects of some of the changes. Over the past six months, the government has sold tens of thousands of cars it seized in recent years because they had been imported illegally. Car prices, which for years were highly inflated because of tight import restrictions, have now fallen by as much as 50 percent, though they are still higher than in neighboring countries. A ban on motorcycle imports has also been lifted, a move that is likely to transform the lives of thousands of people in towns and cities. Motorcycles remain barred from Yangon. The mastermind of the privatization is widely believed to be the junta leader, Senior Gen. Than Shwe. Despite the changes, the military seems likely to retain its place of power, even if behind a semblance of civilian governance. In addition to the 25 percent of seats reserved for the military in the new Parliament, amending the Constitution will require more than 75 percent of representatives’ votes. With the leader of the opposition, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, under house arrest and 2,100 political prisoners in jails scattered around the country, the elections are being criticized as a sham by many Burmese exile groups. “For these elections to be considered credible and legitimate, it’s absolutely essential that the government release the prisoners of conscience currently being held and allow those who wish to participate in the elections to do so,” said Andrew Heyn, the British ambassador here. But the changes are nonetheless seen as important. The last time Parliament met in Myanmar was 1962. Laws that today are passed by military orders would be replaced by legislation in Parliament. In recent weeks, the local news media have been allowed to publish articles condemning child labor and forced labor, both of which are illegal but persistent, especially in rural areas. The government is working with the International Labor Organization to crack down on the practice by local commanders of hiring child soldiers. “It’s a completely different environment from a few years ago,” said Steve Marshall, the head of the International Labor Organization office here. “There is very much more acceptance for the need to work together. They want to be seen as a professional military.” |
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
