Burma Update
News and updates on Burma15 November 2010
News on Burma - 15/11/10
FIRST PUBLIC SPEECH Suu Kyi faces long 'struggle' BangkokPost: 14/11/2010 Burma's long-suffering people are eagerly putting their hopes for a better future in the hands of democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi, but observers warn the dissident is no "miracle worker". There was a new air of optimism on the streets of Rangoon on Sunday as Suu Kyi awoke to her first full day of freedom. Thousands turned out to hear her first address since her release from house arrest on Saturday, suggesting her absence has not dimmed the popularity of the daughter of the nation's founding father in the eyes of many. "I hope Aung San Suu Kyi's freedom will be the beginning of a happy journey for us," said a 50-year-old taxi driver in Burma's main city. "It is a special day for all the Burmese people. Our leader is free." But experts said Suu Kyi -- locked up by the junta for most of the past two decades -- may struggle to live up to the huge expectations of supporters, who are eager for democratic change after almost five decades of military rule. "The poor woman has a lot of pressure on her shoulders and she is not a miracle worker," said Thailand-based Burma analyst Aung Naing Oo. "She needs to tell the people to be realistic, to be patient. The path to democracy is a process. Democracy won't come to Burma immediately," he said, using the country's former name. The Nobel Peace laureate is herself keenly aware of the challenges and has urged her followers to give her time. She signalled she was ready to put aside differences with rival opposition factions, saying: "I want to work with all democratic forces." The big question is whether the softly spoken leader can restore unity among the junta's political opponents after an election a week ago that was widely criticised by the West as sham to prolong military rule. Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy (NLD) party was disbanded after it boycotted the vote, a decision that deeply split and weakened the opposition. "Her main task will probably be to try to rebuild her party so that they can participate in the next election," said Trevor Wilson, a former Australian ambassador to Burma. Many senior members of her party are in their 80s and 90s. Some younger colleagues who disagreed with the boycott bolted to stand in the poll, prompting accusations of betrayal from some of her closest associates. A leader of the breakaway party, the National Democratic Force, signalled it was still ready to work with Suu Kyi, describing her as "a torch of democracy for Burma." "We see her not only as the head of the NLD but also the democracy leader for 59 million people," Khin Maung Swe told AFP. Freeing Suu Kyi was a huge gamble for Burma's generals, but it proves that they feel secure after the main army-backed party claimed a landslide win in the controversial November 7 poll, according to Aung Naing Oo. "The military is really confident and they don't consider her as a threat," he said. Suu Kyi has spent 15 of the past 21 years confined to her crumbling lakeside mansion in Rangoon, with the junta repeatedly finding new excuses to extend her detention or detain her after brief periods of freedom. While the junta says it has imposed no restrictions on her movements, Suu Kyi will still have to watch her step, said Pavin Chachavalpongpun, a fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore. "She has to be careful not to cross the line of the military regime," he said. "Nobody can read the regime's mind, but I am sure there is a line. She is not allowed to do whatever she would like to do. She has to be careful not to jeopardise her freedom, otherwise she will end up in house arrest again." Burma's new political landscape also means that Suu Kyi might have to "compromise a little bit and work with the new government," added Pavin. Another question mark concerns her relations with Burma's ethnic rebels who have waged war against the state since independence in 1948, leading to six decades of civil conflict in certain regions. "There are a lot of unresolved issues with the ethnic minorities," said Wilson, adding that it was not an area Suu Kyi, who belongs to the Burman majority group, had devoted a lot of attention to in the past. "The government has handled those issues very, very poorly. If she could play some kind of a role as a mediator, that could be very useful," he said. (http://www.bangkokpost.com/print/206360/) World hails Suu Kyi release BangkokPost: 14/11/2010 World leaders and rights groups hailed the release of Burma's democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi but warned the junta not to restrict her and called for the release of all political prisoners. US President Barack Obama said that "while the Burmese regime has gone to extraordinary lengths to isolate and silence Aung San Suu Kyi, she has continued her brave fight for democracy, peace, and change in Burma". "She is a hero of mine and a source of inspiration for all who work to advance basic human rights in Burma and around the world," said Obama in a statement on Saturday, using the country's former name. In Oslo, the Norwegian Nobel Committee invited Suu Kyi to make the traditional acceptance speech the Nobel Peace laureate was prevented from giving in 1991, the NTB news agency reported. China, one of Burma's closest allies and a mainstay for the junta through trade ties and arms sales had no immediate reaction, although the official Xinhua news agency did report the release of the "noted political figure". India, which has also been accused of turning a blind eye to the regime's abuses, greeted her release as a welcome step forward in efforts to achieve "a more inclusive approach to political change" in its southeastern neighbour. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) which includes Burma but has been accused by the West of not doing enough to push for change in the military-ruled country, welcomed the release. "I'm very, very relieved and hope that this will contribute to true national reconciliation," said the bloc's secretary-general Surin Pitsuswan. Pitsuswan said he hoped Suu Kyi would be able to play a role in any reform process, while Asean's largest member Indonesia said the release was a "positive step" towards national reconciliation. Neighbouring Thailand, a major trading partner, echoed the sentiment, saying it hoped that Suu Kyi "will have a constructive role to play in Burma's nation-building process". While the reaction to Suu Kyi's release was broadly positive, several leaders and rights groups urged Burma to do more. Obama said it was "time for the Burmese regime to release all political prisoners", in a statement echoed by Australia. "The release of Aung San Suu Kyi offers the Burmese authorities an opportunity to move the country forward," said Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Amnesty International said Suu Kyi's release was not a "concession" by the regime and should not take attention away from other prisoners of conscience being held in "deplorable conditions". Human Rights Watch said the release was a "cynical ploy by the military government to distract the international community from its illegitimate elections" held this month and called for all political prisoners to be freed. French President Nicolas Sarkozy said "France will be extremely attentive to the conditions in which Madame Aung San Suu Kyi enjoys her refound liberty". Any "restrictions on her freedom of movement and expression would constitute a new unacceptable denial of her rights," he said in a statement. But a senior Burma official said no conditions were tied to Suu Kyi's release. "She is completely free -- there are no conditions at all," the official told AFP on condition of anonymity. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called Suu Kyi "an inspiration" to the world. "The secretary general expects that no further restrictions will be placed on her, and he urges the Burma authorities to build on today?s action by releasing all remaining political prisoners," a spokesman said. Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain, the former colonial ruler, called her release "long overdue", branding her detention for 15 of the last 21 years a "travesty, designed only to silence the voice of the Burmese people". Desmond Tutu, chair of the group of retired senior statesmen known as The Elders, called Suu Kyi "a global symbol of moral courage" and said her release "offers hope to the people of Burma". In Brussels European Commission head Jose Manuel Barroso called for Suu Kyi to be granted "unrestricted freedom of movement and speech" and echoed the call for the release of political prisoners. UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay meanwhile called Suu Kyi's release "a positive signal" by Burma authorities and said she could "make a major contribution" in the transition to democracy and national reconciliation. Europe's top rights body, the 47-member Council of Europe groups welcomed her release as "an important day for human rights defenders worldwide". (http://www.bangkokpost.com/print/206354/) Emotions Peak As Suu Kyi Is Freed IPS: Nov 13 Yan Paing RANGOON - Some were smiling, many were crying and others were shouting, but emotions overflowed among the hundreds of Burmese who had been keeping vigil for the latest release from house arrest of the country’s pro-democracy leader, Aung San Suu Syi. Suu Kyi, who has been under house arrest for 15 of the last 21 years, appeared beaming on an elevated platform behind the steel gate of her compound here minutes after her 5:20 pm release on Nov. 13. Waiting for the crowd to settle down, Suu Kyi, often called ‘The Lady’, finally spoke in public for the first time in years. "We haven't seen each other for long time. I feel very happy to see you all here," said the 65-year-old Nobel laureate, who was freed by Burma’s military leaders six days after the Nov. 7 general election here, the first held in this South-east Asian country in 20 years. "As I don't have a loudspeaker, I can't speak to reach you all," she told the crowd, many of them wearing shirts adorned with her portrait or carrying photos of her. "If you can listen quietly, you can hear my voice. Otherwise, it's very hard to speak. You all have to help each other. If people from the back can't hear what I say, then people from the front role are able to share what you hear." "See! As soon as I come out, I need to start political training," quipped Suu Kyi. "To get democracy, we all have to be disciplined," she told her restless, eager supporters. There was little that the riot police could do earlier when, after they removed the barbed wire that for years fenced off Suu Kyi’s compound near Inya Lake, the crowds rushed toward her home. "Today we can see the real desire of the people," Yarzar, who belongs to the youth wing of Suu Kyi’s now disbanded National League for Democracy (NLD) party, said as he took part in this historic moment in this country of more than 53 million people. "I feel like my feet are up in the air, like I’m flying!" quipped Maung Aye. Than Than Aye, a 35-year-old who fails from north Okkalapa, remarked: "I feel so happy to see her. Today is very worth (it) for me to wait for her for two days." Since Friday, many had gathered around Suu Kyi’s compound to see if Burma’s military bosses would free her at the end of her latest detention period, scheduled to end at 7 p.m. Saturday. Others had come to Rangoon, the former capital, from outside the city. As of Saturday evening, Suu Kyi was meeting her NLD supporters. She is expected to give a speech at her office at noon Sunday. It remained unclear whether there are any conditions to her release, and what her plans are after the Nov. 7 election, which her party did not take part in and campaigned for a boycott of. Some NLD members however proceeded to contest the poll. It also remains to be seen what role Suu Kyi could play in an environment where there could be some representation of anti-junta groups in Parliament, and where she has no official political platform after the NLD’s disbandment. The NLD won a clear majority in the last general election in 1990, but the junta nullified its result. Suu Kyi’s struggles go back to 1988, when the daughter of independence hero Aung San returned to Burma and became involved in the opposition to then dictator Ne Win. She was first put under house arrest in 1989, released with restrictions on her movement in 1995, and put back in house arrest in 2000. She was released again in May 2002, but in May 2003 was back in prison after a clash between her supporters and a government-backed mob. Her house arrest was extended in 2007 and 2008, and in August 2009 she was sentenced to another 18 months’ house arrest after a U.S. national swam to her compound. Her last brief public appearance was in September 2007 -- and that was the first since 2003. Her supporters are aware that Suu Kyi’s personal freedom does not signify real change by the military on giving more political openness in this country. "The most important thing is to start the dialogue, the only way to solve all the problems in Burma," NLD vice chairman Tin Oo told IPS. "First, all political prisoners must be released. We have to discuss about ethnic issues too," he said, referring to decades of unrest and armed struggle by Burma’s ethnic groups. There are different expectations of Suu Kyi’s role after her release. "I strongly believe her to be the one who can do (change) for the country; I can even give my life for her," said Maung Maung Tin Lay, an 80-year-old veteran soldier. Twenty-five year-old Tun Tun from Hlaing Tharyar added, "I expect that Aunty Suu will tell something about election fraud when she is released." He was referring to results and conduct of the November poll, which the junta says is part of a roadmap to democracy but which critics have called a sham to cloak the military regime in civilian clothes. Tension remains after the vote, after many opposition candidates alleged fraud and filed complaints before the Election Commission. As expected, the military’s proxy party, the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), won majority of seats in the two chambers of Parliament and regional assemblies. More than 800,000 ‘advance votes’ cast by government employees and the military, days before Nov. 7 itself, have been criticised as leading to forced votes to ensure the USDP’s victory. "The 2010 election is just a kind of robbery. It’s not (even) voting fraud; USDP robbed all votes," remarked Tin Oo. Given the uncertain political road ahead, the sentiments of Rangoon resident Soe Naing, 30, may well capture those of many in this country. "I don’t expect much after her release, but we have to think how we can support her," sighed Soe Naing. (http://www.ipsnews.net/print.asp?idnews=53553) After Suu Kyi’s Release, Dangerous Time Sets In IPS: Nov 13 Marwaan Macan-Markar BANGKOK - A dilapidated colonial villa on the banks of the Inya Lake in Rangoon, Burma’s largest city, has regained its identity as a home – instead of a prison – following the Saturday release of Aung San Suu Kyi, the icon of the military-ruled country’s democracy movement. Yet it is not the first time that this change of identity has taken place. The 65-year-old Nobel Peace laureate’s release from house arrest by the junta brought to an end her seven-year stretch of political isolation, which began after pro-regime thugs attacked Suu Kyi and her supporters in central Burma in May 2003. Suu Kyi, the daughter of Burma’s independence hero Aung San, has been granted freedom twice before since her first imprisonment in her ancestral home in July 1989. The freedoms granted to her by the military leaders of Burma, or Myanmar, were never permanent. Thus, this early, as Suu Kyi takes her first tentative steps as a free Burmese citizen after spending 15 of the past 21 years as a prisoner in her home, concern is already being expressed about whether her freedom will be short- lived. "This is a very dangerous period," says Khin Ohmar, chairwoman of the Network for Democracy and Development in Burma, a umbrella organisation of Burmese political activists in exile. "The regime is not releasing her out of respect that she has an important role to play in Burma’s political process and national reconciliation." The regime’s record over the past two decades feeds such worries. The junta’s reclusive strongman, Senior Gen. Than Shwe, has strengthened the military’s numbers and issued an order that has crushed any hint of political freedom and democratic sentiment. "In the last 20 years, every single move by the regime has been to its benefit," Khin Ohmar explained during a telephone interview from the Thai- Burma border. "It has always been a part of their control strategy. They have never changed." Some former political prisoners even worry for Suu Kyi’s life now that she has the liberty to go around in public. "We are concerned that she may be rearrested on some charge or attacked by government thugs," said Bo Kyi, joint secretary of the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners in Burma (AAPP), a group that campaigns for the rights of jailed political dissidents. "She has been attacked before." Suu Kyi’s long spells as a political prisoner and how she has been treated once free have shaped these deep doubts about the junta’s motives. "There is no rule of law in Burma," Bo Kyi, himself a former political prisoner, told IPS. "The regime’s motives are never sincere." Suu Kyi has been a thorn in the side of Burma’s military rulers since her return to the country in early 1988 to take care of her ailing mother. Her arrival after a long absence abroad coincided with a pro-democracy uprising that year against a military regime that had been in power since a 1962 coup. The political neophyte was soon propelled into being a star of the country’s young democracy movement, drawing hundreds of thousands of supporters to a mass political rally she addressed in late 1988 in Rangoon. Soon after, she helped found the National League for Democracy (NLD) to contest the 1990 general election, the first multi-party poll in 28 years. Yet her freedom was short-lived as the military leaders -- who had already crushed the 1988 pro-democracy uprising where 3,000 people were killed -- discovered the power of Suu Kyi’s message of democracy and non-violence. She was forced off the streets and imprisoned in her home almost a year before the 1990 elections, beginning her first stretch under house arrest that lasted six years. But Burmese voters had other ideas. They gave the NLD a thumping majority, some 82 percent of the seats in the national legislature, in that 1990 poll. But the junta refused to recognise the results, setting into motion a long acrimonious relationship between those armed with the guns and those who derived strength from non-violent democratic sentiments. "It is asymmetrical politics that you started to see in Burma after Suu Kyi arrived on the scene," said a Rangoon-based political analyst. "You had the powerful, heavily armed military against a woman leading a movement that stood for peaceful political change through democracy." "She deserves credit for making the democracy movement in Burma a non- violent one and helping to keep it that way," the analyst, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told IPS. "The anti-regime forces could have easily turned violent out of frustration and years of suppression." Her stature in the past two decades has also gone beyond the country’s majority Burman ethnic community and reached the country’s patchwork of ethnic minority communities that have been at war and have endured decades of oppression under the grip of a Burman-dominated military. Analysts have credited Suu Kyi and the NLD for getting the ethnic minorities to feel part of the movement for political change, though their push for tripartite talks between the regime, the pro-democracy movement and the ethnic minorities. Among these groups are the Karen, one of the largest ethnic nationalities whose rebel forces have been waging a separatist struggle for six decades. "We are very happy to see Aung San Suu Kyi freed after so many years," said Zipporah Sein, general secretary of the Karen National Union. "She is very important for the ethnic groups and for the people of Burma because of her struggle for rights." (http://www.ipsnews.net/print.asp?idnews=53554) Aung San Suu Kyi 'completely free' bangkokPost: 13/11/2010 Burma's pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi has been released with no conditions on her freedom, according to an official in the military-ruled country. "She is completely free -- there are no conditions at all," the senior government official told AFP, speaking on condition of anonymity. Suu Kyi's supporters have voiced concern that the junta may place restrictions on her activities and movements as it did during her previous brief periods of freedom. State media confirmed her release from the latest seven-year stretch of house arrest, attributing it to good conduct. "Aung San Suu Kyi behaved well according to the regulations during the period she was under a suspended sentence," government-controlled television reported. "So she was allowed to be released from her sentence." It noted that she was "the daughter of the leader General Aung San who gave his life for Burma's independence" and it also expressed a desire "not to have a grudge against each other." (http://www.bangkokpost.com/print/206257/) In a glass palace – Sagari Chhabra Hindustan Times: Fri 12 Nov 2010 No one expected the Myanmar military junta’s elections to be fair. But how flawed should things be allowed to get? The military-supported USDP (Union Solidarity and Development Party) has cornered 80% seats (they are still counting as we go to press), but then who had predicted ‘advance voting’ with government employees instructed to vote in front of officials, villagers in the presence of village heads and soldiers before their commanders?The National League of Democracy (NLD), headed by Aung San Suu Kyi, which won over 80% seats in the last elections, did not even contest. The papers for Suu Kyi’s release from house arrest have been signed as her incarceration ends today. She has been detained for 15 of the past 21 years. In fact, along with nine other parties, including the Shan Nationalities League of Democracy, the NLD has been de-registered and is now outlawed in Myanmar. The new constitution — nicknamed the Nergis Constitution as it came into effect when the country was ravaged by a devastating cyclone — reserves a fourth of the seats in the two houses for the military along with key ministries that will also be headed by the military. The Commander-in-Chief can assume full sovereign power by declaring an emergency. Myanmar is also plagued by a lack of unity among 135 nationalities including eight major ones — namely Araken, Chin, Kachin, Karen, Karenni, Mon, Shan, and the Burmese. Neither the years of parliamentary democracy, between 1948 and 1962, nor the subsequent years have seen any resolution of the civil strife in Myanmar. The NLD and some ethnic allies created a new avenue on October 24, as they have agreed to work towards the second Pinglong Conference, which will be a new political platform. This is a progressive move since the Committee Representing Peoples’ Parliament (CRPP), which was formed on September 16, 1998, to work on behalf of the 1990 parliament, becomes irrelevant after the 2010 election charade. In the context of so much power being institutionalised in the world’s longest-running, most tyrannical regime, with the backing of China and a studied silence from the country’s democratic neighbour, what is the future of Aung San Suu Kyi and the other 2,000 political prisoners? Since the military has consolidated itself in more palatable terms, some would say that Aung San Suu Kyi, for whose freedom the United Nations General Assemby has been passing a resolution every single year, should now be allowed to participate in politics. Perhaps she has been rendered unnecessary in the new scheme of things. A carefully-plotted roadmap to squash dissenters, unveiling an iniquitous constitution and having a full-scale drama of an election have all gone off, according to General Than Swe’s meticulous plans. It would also lend a more democratic image to the electoral farce, which has propelled several thousand refugees to flee to neighbouring Thailand. As I travelled across Myanmar earlier, I saw how even the Burmese people have to register at the nearest police station by 8 pm if they are to have an overnight guest and that the only construction activity I witnessed was the building of a new prison on the road to Maymyo. An entire generation has grown up in a glass palace prison. In April 1989, Aung San Suu Kyi went with a group of her party activists to the Irrawaddy Delta. They arrived by boat in the town of Danubyu. As they walked towards the local NLD office, they found their way blocked by soldiers who pointed automatic guns towards them. Suu Kyi urged her people to keep moving even as the captain in-charge threatened to shoot. Just then a senior officer rushed and ordered his men to step aside. Suu Kyi had followed in the footsteps of Mahatma Gandhi and adopted his policy of satyagraha in Myanmar. She had hoped that this would spread across the country and the second struggle for freedom in Myanmar will be played out on similar lines. It did not happen. She was placed under house arrest on July 20, 1989. As some one who spent several months researching in Myanmar, living down the road from Suu Kyi’s house in the hope of meeting her, her release was something I, along with several across the world, prayed for. The frail lady is feared by the military. The lady with flowers in her hair, throttled in a bottleneck vase for the last 15 years, symbolises the results and hopes of the last elections that were never honoured. Her release will upset the ‘unjust peace’ that is about to settle over Myanmar. It is, however, about time that the world that awarded Suu Kyi the Nobel Peace Prize and India, which honoured her with the Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding, presses for a greater role in Myanmar’s affairs for her. A democratic voice that represents the just aspirations of its people cannot be suppressed anymore. The military junta, now that it has doffed its blood-soaked uniforms, is camouflaging itself in pleasant, sweet terms and has won the elections hands down, could perhaps be pushed to do a nice, gentlemanly act — engage with Suu Kyi. While the Myanmar court rejected her appeal for the reversal of General Than Swe’s order , the executive order rescinded it. It takes credit for releasing her; for even generals like to appear virtuous. Suu Kyi has not been able to see her own children for years. Her son, Kim, has just been granted a visa to visit her. But don’t forget that Suu Kyi was not even allowed to visit her dying husband Michael Aris. The British High Commissioner carried her farewell letter to him, in secret. Meanwhile, the world continues to watch with bated breath for the one preaches and practises ahimsa to take her rightful place in guiding the destiny of Myanmar’s long-suffering people. Sagari Chhabra is a writer and film director. Her forthcoming book In Search Of Freedom is based on her stay in Myanmar. The views expressed by the author are personal. Barkha Dutt’s fortnightly column Third Eye will return on November 27. Myanmar’s Suu Kyi to face new landscape Agence France Presse: Fri 12 Nov 2010 Yangon – From web cafes to a skyline dotted with high-rise buildings, much has changed since Aung San Suu Kyi began her most recent stretch of detention — including Myanmar’s political landscape. After seven straight years of confinement, deprived of access to a telephone line or the Internet, one of the first things the 65-year-old has said she plans to do is join Twitter to reach out to younger generations. Myanmar’s most famous dissident will also have a new political reality to deal with in the army-run country, which held its first election in 20 years on Sunday with Suu Kyi sidelined and silenced. Her isolated existence has left her “out of touch”, said Pavin Chachavalpongpun, a research fellow at the Institute of South East Asia Studies in Singapore. “She cannot access the Internet and people who give her information all have their own agendas. Sometimes they read the situation completely wrongly,” he said. The big question is whether Suu Kyi can galvanise Myanmar’s opposition, deeply divided by her support for a boycott of Sunday’s vote, in which the military’s political proxies have claimed a landslide win. A group of former members of her National League for Democracy (NLD) which broke away to run in Sunday’s poll was accused by Suu Kyi’s closest associates of betraying the party. Suu Kyi’s NLD won a landslide victory in the previous poll in 1990 but the junta never allowed her to take power and she has been detained from most of the past two decades. “If she wants to fight with the new government she has to make sure she strengthens opposition parties first… recruits new and young politicians to make sure there’s someone who can carry out her message,” said Pavin. The fate of the country’s many ethnic groups is another major issue and observers say Suu Kyi, an ethnic Burman, is perceived by some as part of the elite that have sidelined minority issues for decades. For many though, the daughter of Myanmar’s liberation hero General Aung San remains a beacon of hope for a better future, drawing large crowds when she was last freed in 2002. While releasing her could deflect criticism of Sunday’s poll, it may be risky for the junta because few expect her to give up her long struggle to bring democracy to what is one of the world’s oldest dictatorships. “She is not going to be a humanitarian queen. She is going to do politics. She is as political as ever,” said Maung Zarni, a Myanmar research fellow at the London School of Economics. In the past the regime has tried to put conditions on her freedom, such as by barring her from leaving Yangon. Some fear they will do the same again, setting the scene for possible confrontation with the authorities that could land Suu Kyi back in detention. Thailand-based expert Aung Naing Oo said freeing her would show that the generals “no longer fear her political potency” but the regime is still likely to insist on severe restrictions. “She is not a quiet type… there will be an unspoken demand from the people for her to do something, perhaps about the election results,” he said. Many in Myanmar still look to Suu Kyi to bring them the democracy after almost five decades of autocratic rule. “I think even the Gods are afraid of the junta. Someone will have to stop this military government and I think only Suu Kyi can,” said a 60-year-old former gem miner in Yangon. A 45-year-old businessman said Suu Kyi was the one person who could stand up to the junta. “The lady is courageous. Despite all attempts to silence her, she continues to voice the hopes and aspirations of the people who want democracy,” he said. Issues Suu Kyi should deal with – Editorial Irrawaddy: Fri 12 Nov 2010 Burma’s democratic leader Aung San Suu Kyi has spent 15 of the past 21 years in detention. Her latest period of house arrest, which began in May 2003, is due to end this weekend, and she is expected to re-engage in politics after her release. The Irrawaddy has identified six areas where her leadership could be instrumental in finding long-term solutions to political and cultural issues. • The Junta: Suu Kyi has tried to seek a political dialogue with the junta to restore national reconciliation in the country, but that effort has failed during the past 20 years. The junta has refused to open a door for a genuine dialogue. For now, she should work to engage a broad participation of other stakeholders from the academic, social and economic sectors to seek a broad-based consensus for national reconciliation throughout the country. • Political Prisoners: Despite her release, there are more than 2,100 political prisoners locked up in prisons across the country. The release of all political prisoners should be a priority when she resumes the leadership of the democratic movement. • National Unity and Ethnic Armed Conflicts: She has already initiated the idea of holding “a second Panglong conference” to restore the unity of all ethnic nationals residing in the country, but she has not been able to effectively deal with the issues affecting the cease-fire and non-ceasefire ethnic groups in the past. The recent armed conflicts between the junta’s troops and a splinter group of the cease-fire Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) in Karen State showed the need to end armed conflicts. She should focus on a dialogue with all ethnic groups, including the cease-fire armed groups, that leads to the creation of a second Panglong conference. • Political Division: Political divisions have intensified due to the recent election. Democratic forces are divided into two political camps: those who boycotted the election and those who contested the election. As democratic leader, Suu Kyi should seek an opportunity to talk with both camps and try to reconcile their differences. She should first initiate a reunion of the NLD and the National Democratic Force (NDF), which broke away from the NLD. Moreover, unlike the political landscape before her detention in 2003, new political parties now exist. She must initiate a political strategy to include them in a reconciliation effort. • The 2008 Constitution and the 2010 Election Results: The NLD rejected the Constitution as undemocratic. The Nov. 7 election held in accord with the Constitution was deeply flawed by the junta’s vote rigging and violations of its own electoral laws. Suu Kyi should take this opportunity to form a broader political alliance to address Constitutional and parliamentary issues. • Sanctions, Aid and the International Community: Suu Kyi has voiced her interest in finding a way to lift the international economic sanctions that affect the people and she has tried to extend her hand to the junta to cooperate in lifting the sanctions. After a review of all sanctions, she should work for their elimination, and work to formulate a clear policy on international humanitarian aid to Burma, and seek ways to broaden access to international aid programs that seek to work inside the country. Junta’s Asian Friends Close Ranks, Endorse Poll IPS: Nov 11 Marwaan Macan-Markar BANGKOK - A political fault line has emerged just days after Burma’s junta held the country’s first election in two decades, one that was held on Nov. 7 with near military precision to ensure a sweeping victory for the military regime’s allies. This divide playing out on the international stage reflects foreign governments’ contrasting views of the poll, which is part of the junta’s seven- step roadmap to install a discipline-flourishing democracy in the South-east Asian nation. The junta’s political proxy, the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), claims to have won over 80 percent of seats in Parliament, as was predicted by critics of the regime. Also expected were the litany of charges of fraud, vote rigging and the abuse of power by pro-regime factions. Coming to the defence of the regime in Burma, or Myanmar, are the country’s Asian neighbours, some of which had shown signs of encouragement before the poll. In this chorus is the Association of South- east Asian Nations (ASEAN), a 10-member regional bloc that includes Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam, in addition to Burma. "ASEAN welcomes the General Election held on 7th November 2010 in Myanmar as a significant step forward in the implementation of the 7-point Roadmap for Democracy," declared Vietnam, the current chair of the regional bloc that has a history of throwing a protective cloak around Burma when it comes to international criticism. "ASEAN encourages Myanmar to continue to accelerate the process of national reconciliation and democratisation, for stability and development in the country," added the foreign ministry of Vietnam, a country under the iron grip of its own communist party that brooks no opposition and has been hostile toward any hint of democracy within its borders. Asia’s communist giant China has been as unequivocal about its support for Burma, where it has invested millions of dollars to exploit the country’s rich natural resources. "This is a critical step for Myanmar in implementing the seven-step road map in the transition to an elected government and is thus welcome," a foreign ministry spokesman in Beijing told the media. But in sharp contrast against China and the majority of ASEAN members -- which have limited to non-existent democratic cultures -- are the industrialised nations in the west that have condemned the poll as a sham. "It is unacceptable to steal an election, as the regime in Burma has done again for all the world to see," said U.S. President Barack Obama in a speech to the Indian parliament, echoing the sentiments expressed in London and some European capitals. This East-West divide reflects just how open to interpretation a contentious election is. "The governments in the region were looking at what existed before and they see the poll as paving the way for something different," said Thant Myint-U, a respected Burmese historian and author. "The western governments judged the election by the high democratic standards they are familiar with." Yet he cautions against expecting more from what some see as the military’s loosening of some of its grip on power for this election, only the second multi-party poll to be held since the military grabbed power in a 1962 coup. "It is difficult to say, because any political opening is going to be tenuous," Thant told IPS. "One cannot say how long the political space will last." The guarded sense of optimism about more openness under the oppressive junta has been shaped by a noticeable opening – however small – for Burmese to converse openly about democracy on the streets and in teashops following an order in August that said "democracy" is a permissible word. Supporters of the opposition parties disillusioned by their candidates’ defeat due to the "advanced voting" mechanism, under which government employees, the military and people travelling on voting day were given the option to cast their ballots days before Nov. 7, have not gone silent since that day, says a Rangoon-based analyst. "People are frustrated, people are angry and there is a feeling of politics in the air." But analysts familiar with Burma’s reclusive strongman, Senior Gen Than Shwe, point out that the regime has no intention of conceding even marginal ground to its political opponents. "If the final vote in the parliament was fixed so that the USDP got 70 percent of the votes and the opposition got 30 percent, then it would have confirmed that there was a small and relevant opening for the opposition," said Win Min, a Burmese national security expert. "That 30 percent would have given the opposition enough power to at least summon the parliament for a sitting." But the regime, which under the Constitution had been guaranteed 110 seats in the 440-seat national legislature for non-elected military offices, wanted to assert its dominance in this new political arena, revealed Win Min. "They wanted to have a symbolic yet weak opposition. It shows their true colours; they did not want to make any concessions." The means for ensuring this dominance was advanced voting, under which an estimated two percent of the nearly 30 million registered voters were given the option to vote ahead. The regime reportedly went "door-to-door" to get members of a pro-junta social and development association that gave rise to the USDP to vote ahead, tapping its nearly 17 million members. "This is why advance voting was the game changer," said Win Min. "Governments who are endorsing the election should take note of this rigging." (http://www.ipsnews.net/print.asp?idnews=53530) Few Surprises in First Poll in 20 Years IPS: Nov 9, 2010 By Yan Paing RANGOON - "People were busy watching Al-Jazeera and DVB (Democratic Voice of Burma) TV, but not about the vote," a Buddhist monk here remarked at the end of election day on Nov. 7, the first general poll to be held in this military-ruled country in 20 years. After all, they expected few surprises in the vote for a two-chamber parliament and 14 regional assemblies, contested by some 3,000 candidates. What became news for many, rather than the vote itself, were reports of fighting between Burmese and ethnic Karen soldiers in Myawaddy, a town on Burma’s border with Thailand. The Karen forces had attacked government buildings in Myawaddy to protest the election but media reports said the Burmese military had retaken control of the town. On Tuesday, the main military-backed political party – the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) -- said that it won about 80 percent of the votes. More than two-thirds of the candidates were fielded by two political parties linked to the military junta, including the USDP. Official results have yet to be announced. Voter turnout figures were unclear but some media estimates put it at as low as 35 percent in some areas. The USDP had widely been expected to emerge the victor in an election that opposition parties and many foreign governments called a sham designed to cloak military rule in civilian cover. China however expressed support for the poll as being part of a transition to an elected government. Several opposition groups and independent observers reported irregularities, in particular the practice of ‘advance voting’. In advance voting, government workers, including soldiers, were brought to voting booths to cast their ballots days before Nov. 7, a practice that critics say was to ensure they voted for pro-military choices. "I think the early vote is a kind of instructed, advanced attempt that was something that the polling staff could not reject," said 25-year-old Kyaw Thura, one of more than 3,000 candidates to seek office in the election. On voting day, Kyaw Thura and his supporters in Khayan constituency observed the conduct of the poll and complained of different forms of fraud – not just early voting, but forced votes. In some cases, villagers became independent poll observers and informed candidates of irregularities they encountered, either by phoning them to report these or sending anonymous letters with complaints of local authorities forcing them to vote for the USDP. "In my thinking, 99 percent of the early votes went to the military proxy party, USDP. Opposition candidates can win for sure -- if early votes are not counted," stressed Kyaw Thura. In an interview, a reporter said he witnessed polling officials casting votes for the USDP on behalf of voters in Tha Byu village in Kwan Chan Gone, about an hour’s travel from Rangoon. "Within half an hour, I found that only two people had cast votes for another party by themselves," he said. In some cases, poll officials instructed villagers to vote for the USDP. Nu from Kotkarate in Karen State said "local authorities asked me to tick a mark beside ‘USDP party’." A 20-year-old worker, Aung Tun, said that trishaw drivers and construction workers went to the polling stations in a slum area in Mawlamyaing, capital of Mon state, after 6 a.m. Sunday clad in new white shirts and sarong, the traditional Burmese attire. "The USDP provided new shirts for us to join their campaign. They asked me to wear this when I go for voting," he said. Media reports said at least six opposition parties had filed complaints with the Election Commission, and some have said they were leading in the counting at the polling stations but lost at the commission level. Naing Aung Chan, a candidate from the Mon ethnic group, sent two complaints against early votes and the USDP’s campaign during the election period. In other places, there were more polling staff and election commission people and just a few voters. Some reported not being able to vote in privacy. "People were shouting at each other and ticking the ballots openly on the table," said a 19-year-old student who took part in his first election in a village near Pathein. In his voting station, Rangoon resident Kyaw Kyaw Zin recalled seeing a table divided into three areas and covered with a foot-high plastic card to allow three voters to cast votes at one time. "(But) there was no privacy at all." "Many voters in my place were poor and illiterate. They could hardly even find their names on the list. They were very confused about the voting process," he recalled. "They just followed what officials told them to do." As for his own choice on voting day, Kyaw Kyaw Zin said he did express his wish as a Burmese citizen, but in a different way. He had at first wanted to boycott the election, but decided to go the voting station to make sure his ballot did not get used to cast a vote for pro-junta candidates. Said he: "I discarded my ballot just to make sure that I show I don’t accept this election at all." |
10 November 2010
News on Burma - 10/11/10
Myanmar army-backed party sweeps election – Aung Hla Tun Reuters: Tue 9 Nov 2010 Yangon – Myanmar’s biggest military-backed party won the country’s first election in 20 years by a landslide on Tuesday after a carefully choreographed vote denounced by pro-democracy parties as rigged to preserve authoritarian rule.Opposition parties conceded defeat but accused the military junta of fraud and said many state workers had been forced to support the army-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) in advance balloting ahead of Sunday’s vote. U.S. President Barack Obama told a news conference in Indonesia Myanmar’s election was neither free nor fair and called on Burmese authorities to immediately and unconditionally release all political prisoners. But China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs lauded the election as “peaceful and successful,” illustrating strengthening ties between energy-hungry China and its resource-rich neighbor. As the votes were counted, government soldiers cleared ethnic minority rebels from an eastern border town after two days of sporadic clashes that killed at least 10 people and sent about 18,000 civilians fleeing into neighboring Thailand. Many refugees had returned to Myanmar by afternoon as the military pushed back the ethnic minority Karen rebels who have resisted central authority for generations since what was then Burma won independence in 1948 from Britain. U.N. refugee agency UNHCR says it is helping about 15,000 refugees who fled to Thailand from fighting in Myawaddy, and monitoring another 3,000 who fled from another area of Myanmar. The fighters say the election and the military’s continued dominance threaten any chance of achieving a degree of autonomy. Stacked with recently retired generals and closely aligned with 77-year-old paramount leader Senior General Than Shwe, the USDP took as many as 80 percent of the available seats for parliament, a senior USDP official told Reuters. But Khin Maung Swe, leader of the National Democratic Force, the largest opposition party, told Reuters: “We took the lead at the beginning but the USDP later came up with so-called advance votes and that changed the results completely, so we lost.” The second-largest pro-democracy party, the Democratic Party (Myanmar), also conceded defeat. “I admit defeat but it was not fair play. It was full of malpractice and fraud and we will try to expose them and tell the people,” its leader, Thu Wai, told Reuters. At least six parties have lodged complaints with the election commission, accusing the USDP of fraud — a charge that is unlikely to gain traction in a country where more than 2,100 political activists are behind bars. FOCUS ON SUU KYI The vote was held with Nobel laureate and pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi in detention and her party disbanded for refusing to take part in an election it said was unfair. She had urged supporters to boycott the poll. With the election over, the spotlight returns to Suu Kyi, who has spent 15 of the past 21 years in detention but is due to be freed when her latest house arrest term expires on Saturday. The United States, Britain, the European Union and Japan repeated calls this week to free the 65-year-old pro-democracy leader whose National League for Democracy beat an army-backed party by a landslide in 1990, a result ignored by the junta. The army-backed USDP’s only real rival, the National Unity Party (NUP), also backed by the army, fared poorly in its quest for 980 seats, winning just 54 in the bicameral parliament and state assemblies. “Some representatives of our party filed complaints about fraud and malpractice by the USDP,” said Tin Aung, a senior NUP official. A strong showing by the NUP would have been seen as a jab against Than Shwe since it is thought to be closer to a different faction in the army. By crushing the NUP, the junta reduces the chance of fissures in the military spilling into the open in parliament. Already, 25 percent of the seats in parliament are reserved for serving generals. Lawmakers are expected to rubber-stamp policies by a cabinet appointed by a president who is not elected by the people but appointed by a parliamentary committee. Opposition lawmakers will have little say and no chance to secure the 75 percent of votes needed to amend a constitution that favors and reserves power for the military. The armed forces supreme commander will choose three serving generals to head defense, interior and border affairs ministries. This is why critics scoff at the military junta’s assertion that the new government will reflect the will of the people. In fact, parliament will have very limited power. Myanmar’s neighbors and partners in ASEAN have been hoping the election would end Myanmar’s isolation and remove hurdles it poses to greater cooperation with the West. China has built up close political and business links with Myanmar while the West has for years shunned its leaders and imposed sanctions over the suppression of democracy and a poor human rights record. Russia also welcomed the vote. “We see the elections as a step in the democratization of Myanmar society in accordance with the political reforms taken by the country’s leadership,” Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement. (Additional reporting by Vorasit Satienlerk, Panarat Thepgumpanant and Somjit Rungjumratrussamee, and Lucy Hornby in Beijing; Writing by Robert Birsel and Jason Szep; Editing by Sugita Katyal) Burmese consider challenge to junta’s poll win – Tim Johnston Financial Times: Tue 9 Nov 2010 Two Burmese opposition parties are considering legal challenges to Sunday’s elections amid signs that the pro-junta Union Solidarity and Development party has been swept into power.In the absence of official results, a senior member of the USDP, which is favoured by the ruling generals, said the party won 80 per cent of seats. Than Nyein, chairman of the National Democratic Force, the largest opposition party, which is considering a challenge, said: “How can it be fair? The people who monitored the result in the polling booths said we won in an overwhelming number of constituencies.” Latest results from the parties show the NDF won just 16 of the 161 seats it contested. Even the National Unity party, broadly aligned with the interests of the regime, has said it will challenge the result, a process that costs $1,000, twice the cost of candidate registration. In Mandalay, the second largest city, election officials said the USDP won 96 of 97 contested seats. Observers said junta allies used advance votes to rig the result. One election observer said: “Where necessary, which was pretty much everywhere, bucket loads of advance votes arrived and tipped the balance in favour of the USDP.” The outcome of the first election in 20 years has not come as a surprise because the generals did not want a repeat of the poll that the opposition National League for Democracy, led by Aung San Suu Kyi, won by a landslide in May 1990. The scale of the apparent victory has snuffed out any notion that the generals wanted even a veneer of democratic legitimacy. Barack Obama, US president, said this week it was “unacceptable to steal elections, as the regime in Burma has done”. China, however, welcomed the elections as a critical step in Burma’s “transition to an elected government”. Phone Win, an unsuccessful independent candidate in Rangoon, said: “If you didn’t have an arrangement with the USDP, you didn’t win. They [the generals] may give us some political space to give themselves legitimacy. If they allow us to continue our political activities, that would be OK but if they don’t allow this, that would be bad.” Aung Naing Oo, a political analyst in Thailand, said the election had at least opened gates that the generals might find hard to close again. “People have been able to speak out and complain publicly. These are important issues in a democracy,” he said. “There are new actors and they will not go down quietly.” The observer had noticed a shift among opposition voters since the ballot. “It’s hard to describe how angry and disappointed they are,” he said. “The frustration is palpable, and it depends on how this sense of anger plays out on the streets.” Junta troops retake Myawaddy as residents return – Wai Moe Irrawaddy: Tue 9 Nov 2010 Mae Sot, Thailand — Burmese junta troops have retaken control of the border town of Myawaddy after a splinter group of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) launched an urban warfare offensive there on Monday, according to Burmese officials.The siege of Myawaddy, opposite Mae Sot on the Thai-Burmese border, sent thousands of local residents fleeing into Thailand. According to the latest reports, most have since returned to Myawaddy, despite concerns that fighting could resume. Sources in Myawaddy said that at least 800 regime troops, some in armored personnel carriers, took part in an overnight operation to oust the DKBA Brigade 5 rebels. They were supported by a newly formed border guard force consisting of former DKBA troops under the command of junta allies. “Troops of the DKBA splinter group pulled out after government troops, supported by border guard forces, launched an operation on Monday night,” said a government official in Myawaddy, speaking on condition of anonymity. “But further attacks are expected in the coming days.” He said about six people had been killed since Monday, with another 30 injured. He denied rumors circulating on Monday that 30 people had been killed in Myawaddy since the fighting started. The official also added that DKBA Brigade 5, under the command of Col Saw Lah Pwe, continues to use rocket-propelled grenade (RPG) launchers to attack Burmese troops in the town. “They launched dozens of RPG attacks on Monday and Tuesday morning, some of them landing on Thai soil, and there have been at least three more since they were forced out of Myawaddy,” said the official. Despite claims that Burmese troops are now firmly in control of the town, many local residents remain concerned about the security situation. On Tuesday morning, many were still crossing the Moei River into Thailand. “People were hiding for their lives in Myawaddy last night,” said Phyu Phyu, a woman who fled the Burmese border town on Tuesday morning with her 3-year-old daughter. “Last night we were hiding at a monastery in the town, along with hundreds of other Myawaddy residents.” According to some who had crossed the border this morning, Thai security forces were blocking newcomers after allowing around 20,000 refugees to enter the country on Monday. “The Thais did not accept us, so we have to go back and take refuge at the monastery again,” said a man who crossed the river into Mae Sot at 7 o’clock on Tuesday morning and returned to Myawaddy at noon. Although most of the refugees had reportedly returned to the town by Tuesday evening, there were also reports that many remain stranded on the Thai side of the river bank. Meanwhile, sources said that DKBA Brigade 5 troops have also pulled out of Three Pagodas Pass and positioned themselves outside of the town. The Burmese army is still reinforcing its troops in Three Pagodas Pass, the sources said. Around 10,000 residents of the town have crossed the border into Sangklaburi, in Thailand’s Kanchanaburi Province. According to sources, two refugees were injured and later died after an RPG hit them on the Thai side of the border. About 80 Buddhist monks in Three Pagodas Pass have requested that DKBA Battalion 907 stop fighting, saying more clashes with Burmese troops will only destroy property and harm lives. The monks stood guard over civilian property on Tuesday night to prevent looting. Myanmar, Russian companies to jointly explore oil, gas Xinhua: Tue 9 Nov 2010 Myanmar and Russian oil companies will jointly explore crude oil and natural gas in Shwe U-ru block (B-2) in Homelin township in Sagaing region, the local Weekly Eleven News reported Tuesday.The project will be implemented by Myanmar’s private Htoo Group companies and the Closed Joint Stock Oil Company “Noble Oil” of the Russian Federation. At present, there are about 47 inland crude oil and natural gas fields with 12 others being extended. Besides the onshore areas, Myanmar has abundance of natural gas resources in the offshore areas. Since 2006, other three Russian oil companies have been engaged in oil and gas exploration in Myanmar under respective contracts. The first Russian company, which is JSC Zarubezhneft Iteraaws along with the Sun Group of India, has been exploring oil and gas at block M-8 lying in the Mottama offshore area under a production sharing contract with the Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise (MOGE) signed in September 2006. The latter two Russian companies — Silver Wave Sputnik Petroleum Pte Ltd and the Silver Wave Energy Pte Ltd of Kalmykia have been drilling Zeebyutaung test well-1 at the inland block B-2 in Pinlebu township of northwestern Sagaing region under another similar contract reached in March 2007. There has been seven foreign companies operating onshore, including Essar Oil Ltd, Focus Energy Ltd, MPRL Exploration and Production Private Ltd, Goldpetrol, CNOOC, Sinopec Oil Company and Chinerry Assests, according to statistics. Obama: Myanmar elections neither free nor fair Deustche Press Agentur: Tue 9 Nov 2010 Jakarta – US President Barack Obama on Tuesday criticized the recent elections in Myanmar, saying Sunday’s polls had been neither free nor fair.He also called on the country’s ruling generals to immediately and unconditionally release all political prisoners. Speaking after talks with his Indonesian counterpart, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Obama said one of the continuing challenges for the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) is Myanmar. Both Indonesia and Myanmar, also known as Burma, are members of ASEAN, a regional organization of 10 member states. “Last week’s elections in Burma were neither free nor fair, and we will continue our efforts to move Burma toward democratic reforms and protection of human rights,” Obama said at a joint press conference. “As first step, the Burmese authorities should immediately and unconditionally release all political prisoners, including [opposition leader] Aung San Suu Kyi,” Obama said. Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) boycotted the elections. It had won the 1990 election by a landslide but was never allowed to take power. China ends blockade of UN nuclear report – Naw Noreeen Democratic Voice of Burma: Tue 9 Nov 2010 China has withdrawn its opposition to a UN report suggesting that North Korea has supplied Burma and other pariah states with nuclear material. The report is said to be making its way to the Security Council after six months spent in limbo due to Beijing’s opposition. “Last week, China chose to keep silent when the sanctions committee asked its members – the 15 nations on the Security Council – if they had any objections to the report. That allowed it to formally move to the council,” Reuters said. The 75-page document details suspicions that North Korea, which has been under tight UN sanctions since it carried out two nuclear tests in 2006 and 2009, has supplied banned material to Naypyidaw, as well as Syria and Iran, according to Reuters, which has seen the report. While the focus of the Council’s discussion will centre on how to ratchet up pressure on Pyongyang, the passing of the report will likely strike a blow to any nascent cooperation between North Korea and Burma. While there is yet no hard evidence that North Korea has supplied Burma with proliferation material, a nuclear programme was uncovered in Burma earlier this year following a five-year investigation by DVB, which has also monitored the steadily warming relations between Naypyidaw and Pyongyang. This appears to have developed under the watchful eye of China, which has rapidly become the economic and political powerhouse of the region. Dr Ian Storey, a China expert at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, told DVB that the change in tack from Beijing, which has in the past blocked UN resolutions on both countries, may signify its growing fears over regional security. “It’s clearly not in China’s interest to have a nuclear power on its borders, either North Korea or Burma,” he said. “It’s too little too late in the case of North Korea, but maybe this is a signal to the Burmese government that China really does oppose it going down the path towards a nuclear weapon.” Burma last week held elections for the first time in two decades, despite the polls being roundly condemned by much of the international community. China however hailed the event as a “step forward”, and will likely seek to boost already substantial investment in the coming years. It is the economic and diplomatic support provided by China that has largely given the regime its political immunity, and provided a crutch for the generals in the face of sanctions from the West. One diplomat however told Reuters that while Burma and Syria had clearly been happy that China had blocked the report, the latest development shows that China now “has other priorities”. Storey said however that Burma “is frankly an embarrassment” to Beijing, and the nuclear threat “makes the situation worse for China,” which has already warned Naypyidaw about border stability following the elections. Knight of the generals? – Shashi Tharoor Times of India: Tue 9 Nov 2010 As stage-managed elections ratify the consequences of three decades of military rule in Myanmar, the perspective from its neighbour India may help explain why there is continued international acceptance of the country’s long-ruling junta.Burma was ruled as part of Britain’s Indian empire until 1935, and the links between the two countries remained strong after Burma gained its independence in 1947. An Indian business community thrived in Burma’s major cities, and cultural and political affinities were well established. India’s nationalist leader and first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, was a close friend of the Burmese nationalist hero Aung San, whose daughter, the Nobel laureate and opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, studied in New Delhi. For many years, India was unambiguously on the side of democracy, freedom and human rights in Burma – and in ways more tangible than the rhetoric of the regime’s western critics. When the generals suppressed the popular uprising of 1988, nullified the overwhelming election victory by Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD) in 1990, shot students, and arrested the newly-elected leaders, India’s government initially reacted as most Indians would have wanted. India gave asylum to fleeing students and a base for their resistance movement (along with some financial help), and supported a newspaper and a radio station that propagated the democratic voice. But then reality intruded. India’s strategic rivals, China and Pakistan, began to court the Burmese generals. Major economic and geopolitical concessions were offered to both suitors. The Chinese even began developing a port on the Burmese coast, far closer to Calcutta than to Canton. And the generals began providing safe havens and arms to a motley assortment of anti-Indian rebel movements that would wreak havoc in India’s north-eastern states and retreat to sanctuaries in the newly-renamed Myanmar. All this was troubling enough to Indian policymakers, who were being painfully reminded of the country’s vulnerability to a determined neighbour. The clincher came when large deposits of natural gas were found in Burma, which, it was clear, would not be available to an India deemed hostile to the junta. India’s rivals were gaining ground in its own backyard, while Indian businesses were losing out on new economic opportunities. The price of pursuing a moral foreign policy simply became too high. So India turned 180 degrees. When Pakistan’s President Pervez Musharraf travelled to Myanmar to celebrate his country’s new relationship with his fellow generals, India’s foreign minister Jaswant Singh soon followed. The increasingly forlorn resistance operations staged from Indian territory were shut down in the hope of reciprocation from the Burmese side. And India sweetened the generals’ tea by providing military assistance and intelligence support to their own never-ending counter-insurgencies. India’s journey was complete: from standing up for democracy, India had graduated to aiding and abetting the military regime in Rangoon (now Yangon). When monks were being mown down on the streets of Yangon in 2006, the Indian government called for negotiations, muttered banalities about national reconciliation, and opposed sanctions. India also sent its minister for oil to negotiate an energy deal, making it clear that the country’s real priorities lay with its own national economic interests, ahead of its solidarity with Burmese democrats. (At the same time, Indian diplomats intervened discreetly from time to time on behalf of Suu Kyi, though their effectiveness was limited by India’s unwillingness to alienate the junta.) All of this was in fact perfectly understandable. Officials in New Delhi were justified in reacting acerbically to western critics of its policy. India needed no ethical lessons from a United States and a Britain that have long coddled military dictators in India’s South Asian neighbourhood, notably in Pakistan. Any Indian government’s primary obligation is to its own people, and there is little doubt that the economic opportunities provided by Burmese oil and gas are of real benefit to Indians. There is also the strategic imperative of not ceding ground to India’s enemies on its own borders. India confronts an inescapable fact of geopolitics: you can put your ideals on hold, but you cannot change who your neighbours are. India’s government cannot be blamed for deciding that its national interests in Burma are more important than standing up for democracy there. The member countries of the Association of South East Asian Nations, on Burma’s eastern flank, have made similar calculations. But many Indians are asking themselves what such a policy does to India as a civilisation. If that idealistic democrat Nehru had not been cremated, India’s stance toward Burma might cause him to turn over in his grave. It is a policy that is governed by the head rather than the heart, but in the process India is losing a little bit of its soul. Here’s the new Burma – Kyaw Zwa Moe Irrawaddy: Tue 9 Nov 2010 Burma’s election is over. What’s new and different after Sunday? Will Burma get a new system that reduces the rule of the military dictatorship?Here the new Burma: All incumbent 27 ministers and deputy ministers of the military government reportedly won in the Sunday elections. Of course, Prime Minister Thein Sein is among them and Foreign Minister Nyan Win won his constituency without a contest because he was unopposed, as were 52 candidates of the junta’s party, the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP). You’ll see a new government composed of many of these incumbent ministers in the coming months. Now, look at the leaders on the State Peace and Development Council: Former generals, No. 3 Thura Shwe Mann and Secretary-1 Tin Aung Myint Oo, won in their constituencies in Naypyidaw. The USDP has reportedly won 82 percent of the seats in parliament. No surprise there. We’ve said repeatedly that Than Shwe and his team would rig votes. Most pro-democracy and ethnic parties that contested in the election knew the USDP would rig votes, but it was even worse than they expected. The USDP made a mockery of the advanced vote process. Witnesses and party leaders said advanced votes would come in whenever a USDP candidate seemed in danger of losing. In Rangoon, they called the advanced votes “joker votes.” Leaders of the National Democratic Force, a breakaway party of detained pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy, said that in some constituencies advance ballots represented about half of the eligible votes. As the biggest opposition party, the NDF contested 164 seats, a handful of the 1,157 seats in parliaments. It won 16 seats, the party said on Tuesday. NDF party leader Khin Maung Swe said that polling station officials in many townships, such as Thanlyin and Kyauktan in Rangoon, suspended the counting of ballots on Sunday night at a point when the count showed the NDF leading. “Joker Votes” were rampant nationwide. In ethnic Mon State, Dr. Min Nwe Soe of the All Mon Region Democracy Party, said, “A suspeciously high percentage of advanced votes were cast in Mudon Township,” in which he contested. Than Than Nu, the daughter of Burma’s first premier, U Nu, told The Irrawaddy on Monday, “This election was the dirtiest among the elections after Burma gained independence from the British in 1948.” She’s one of the “Three Princesses” comprised of Nay Ye Ba Swe and Cho Cho Kyaw Nyein, daughters of former prime ministers of Burma before 1962, when Ne Win’s military government staged a coup. “My father would say so if he were still alive,” said Than Than Nu, who lost as a parliamentary candidate in Mandalay Division representing the Democratic Party (Myanmar). Almost all candidates of the party, including the other two “princesses” and party leader Thu Wai, also lost. The party won a couple of seats out of the 48 constituencies it contested. What else did we get out of this rare election, the first in the 20 years? The border towns of Myawaddy and Three Pagodas Pass, bordering Thailand, are battle grounds, with refugees fleeing the fighting. On election day, an ethnic army splinter group, the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army, engaged government’s troops and seized some government buildings, including police stations, in the two towns. The fighting sent more than 10,000 refugees to Thailand’s Mae Sot. It bodes ill, and is a sign of the instability to come in ethnic areas along the border. “Is something better than nothing?” Or, is “the election an opportunity to move towards democracy?” Those were the optimistic statements of some people inside and outside Burma before the election. Actually, the election may have made things worse. By now, the world has learned a lesson, taught by the ruling generals, that many Burmese have learned repeatedly while living under the generals’ boots for five decades. Finally, how about the junta’s reclusive dictator, Sen-Gen Than Shwe? As commander in chief, he didn’t contest in the election. Will he relinquish power? Don’t forget his main motivation was to gain legitimacy while continuing to rule the country. Thus, he may be elected president by the new parliament. But don’t be surprised if he chooses to remain behind the scenes as the unofficial “Senior President” or “President Mentor,” the real power behind the scenes. So, here’s a snapshot of the new Burma: the new government will be composed of the regime’s incumbent ministers; about 80 percent of the USDP candidates will have seats in the brand new parliament; Than Shwe will be elected president or assume the “President Mentor” role; ethnic groups who signed cease-fire agreements are likely to fight the regime, in response to increased pressure on them to become a border guard force. Oh, yes. Don’t expect to see the release of the more than 2,200 political prisoners under this new government. NDF leader tells opposition parties not to recognize results Irrawaddy: Mon 8 Nov 2010 Rangoon—Burma’s opposition parties in the Sunday polls have been told not recognize the election results without transparency and clarity from the regime’s Election Commission regarding the ballot counts. “We have told other parties not to recognize the results of the polls without a clear explanation about the suspicious advanced votes and other irregular activities in the vote counting,” said Khin Maung Swe, the leader of the National Democratic Force, which fielded 164 candidates. Junta held storm victims’ aid as ransom for votes – Thea Forbes Mizzima News: Mon 8 Nov 2010 Chiang Mai – Regime officials in Burma’s west threatened to cut aid to victims of Cyclone Giri if they failed to vote for the main junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party, a party source said last night. Mizzima received reports late yesterday that people struggling in areas devastated by the cyclone had been among the latest victims of junta-USDP voter coercion. Giri hit western Burma on October 22, killed at least 50 dead and displaced 70,000. Rakhine Nationalities Development Party (RNDP) spokesman Thein Tun Aye told Mizzima last night that “in the storm-affected areas, especially in Myebon, we’ve lost all seats, but in other townships, we won a landslide victory”. He said: “Our candidates told us the authorities, especially the western military commanders, told all the elders and the villagers to vote for the USDP, not our Rakhine Party [RNDP] … and that if the villagers voted for the RNDP they would not receive any provisions or any help.” The USDP had clearly taken advantage of the vulnerability of voters in areas affected by Cyclone Giri, he said. Chapter three of the Union Election Commission Law, section eight, provides that: “The duties and powers of the commission are as follows … postponing and cancelling the elections in constituencies in which free and fair election could not be held due to natural disaster or situation of regional security”. Before the polls, the RNDP had asked junta officials to postpone voting in the state to enable storm victims to recuperate and rebuild their homes. Its calls were ignored. The pre-election junta had used the electoral laws’ powers to postpone voting in areas of Kachin, Karenni, Karen, Mon and Shan states, and yet had deemed it inappropriate in Arakan, where 400,000 people were reportedly affected by the cyclone. Burma election observers report voter intimidation – Jack Davies Guardian (UK): Mon 8 Nov 2010 Rangoon – Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton echo protesters in Japan and Thailand in calling the election in Burma a sham. Independent Burmese observers have reported widespread allegations of voter intimidation and bribery in the country’s first elections in a generation. The poll yesterday has already been written off by most international observers as a sham designed to entrench military rule, but further evidence of vote-rigging by the junta will only weaken its claims to have held a free and fair election. Several hundred observers from a politically neutral Burmese organisation, which cannot be named for security reasons, monitored preparations for the election and polling in districts across the country. They found widespread interference from the junta in the campaign and conduct of the elections, particularly in rural areas. The allegations emerged as at least 10,000 refugees fled across the border into Thailand to escape post-election fighting between government troops and ethnic Karen rebels. Sporadic clashes continued today along the border after rebels of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army seized the police station and post office in the town of Myawaddy. Most of the DKBA sides with the regime, but a faction is fighting with other rebel groups against the central government. At least 10 people were wounded and thousands fled amid gunshots and mortar fire. The US, the UK, the EU and Japan have condemned the vote as neither free nor fair and repeated calls to free the opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Her youngest son, Kim Aris, flew from London to Bangkok last week ahead of her release, which is expected to come on 13 November, but the Burmese embassy denied his application for a visa. Speaking in Delhi, President Obama accused the junta of “stealing the election.” “When peaceful democratic movements are suppressed – as in Burma – then the democracies of the world cannot remain silent. For it is unacceptable to gun down peaceful protestors and incarcerate political presoners decade after decade. It is unacceptable to hold the aspirations of an entire people hostage to the greed and paranoia of a bankrupt regime. It is unacceptable to steal an election as the regime has done again for all the world to see,” he said. The Burmese observers’ accounts of the election are valuable as the junta banned all foreign journalists and monitors from the country ahead of the poll. A Japanese photographer, Toru Yamaji, 49, was detained in Myawaddy after slipping across the Thai border to try to cover the election. State TV said voters cast their ballots “freely and happily” but the observers said many were coerced into voting for the military junta’s political arm, the Union Solidarity and Development party (USDP). Civil servants were told they would lose their jobs if they did not support the party while, in Rakhine state in western Burma, the owners of salt fields were told their land would be confiscated if they did not vote for the USDP. In other areas, villagers were warned all development programmes and public services would be cut if they did not vote for the government. Vote-buying was also reported: 30% of observers reported that cash or in-kind contributions were offered to people in exchange for government votes. In Karen state, a USDP candidate paid village leaders 200,000 kyats (about £125), and in Rakhine state, elderly people were given reading glasses and hospital patients 50,000 kyats by the government’s candidate. Other villages were promised roads or street lighting in exchange for votes. At 13% of polling stations, observers said, voters faced intimidation or disturbance while voting. Several parties have lodged complaints with the electoral commission over advance voting, where the military collected votes from people in the days before the election. Polling stations were allegedly set up in government offices and at industrial zones where large numbers of voters could be signed up. In Keng Tung township in Shan state, all 200 advance votes were cast for the government party. In nearly two-thirds of polling stations, observers reported, advance votes were counted separately from regular votes. Concerns have been raised about votes being counted away from public or opposition party scrutiny. Meanwhile the arcane process of counting votes and declaring a winner was progressing slowly across Burma. It is likely to be days before a final result is known. There has been no official report on the number of votes cast on Sunday, but observers reported a poor turnout across the country, falling as low as 20% in some areas. In what is perhaps an indication of the emerging new government, several names from the military regime were among the first elected. Foreign minister U Nyan Win, forestry minister U Thein Aung and industry minister U Soe Thein are now civilian members of parliament. Forty-one of the 57 seats announced so far went to the junta’s USDP, while the rest were shared by democratic parties, including several ethnic minority parties. Burma uses Chinese investment to harass opponents – Sue Lloyd-Roberts Telegraph (UK): Mon 8 Nov 2010 Chinese investment in Burma has been harnessed by the regime to consolidate control of swathes of territory controlled by rebel ethnic groups on its northern and eastern borders. Mae Hong Son – Chinese investment in Burma has been harnessed by the regime to consolidate control of swathes of territory controlled by rebel ethnic groups on its northern and eastern borders. A Burmese family casts their votes in the capital Naypyitaw, Myanmar Photo: EPA UN chief slams Myanmar vote Agence France Presse: Mon 8 Nov 2010 United Nations – UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on Monday called the Myanmar election “insufficiently” transparent and made a new call for the junta to release political prisoners.Ban also expressed concern about reported clashes between government troops and ethnic rebels since Sunday’s vote “and urges all sides to refrain from any action that could raise tensions further or create instability at this sensitive time,” his spokesman said in a statement. The UN leader, who has frequently expressed frustration at the attitude of Myanmar’s ruling generals, believes “the voting was held in conditions that were insufficiently inclusive, participatory and transparent,” said the statement. Sunday’s vote has been condemned by much of the international community and Myanmar’s opposition as a sham. Pro-junta parties are widely expected to take most seats in the new assembly and Aung San Suu Kyi, the Nobel Peace Prize winning opposition leaders was banned from taking part. “Consistent with their commitments, the authorities must demonstrate that the ballot is part of a credible transition towards democratic government, national reconciliation and respect for human rights,” said the UN chief’s statement. Ban “urges the Myanmar authorities to release all remaining political prisoners and lift restrictions on Daw Aung San Suu Kyi without further delay so that they can freely participate in the political life of their country. “He also urges the Myanmar authorities to ensure that the process of forming new institutions of government is as broad-based and inclusive as possible.” Ban said: “The international community will look to the Myanmar authorities to provide greater assurances that the current process marks a genuine departure from the status quo.” The United Nations warned the junta before the election that it would not be seen as credible if Aung San Suu Kyi and other opponents remained in jail. What the papers say – Francis Wade Democratic Voice of Burma: Mon 8 Nov 2010 By all accounts it was a mute affair: polling stations across the country hosted desultory audiences of voters who braved the soporific atmosphere to cast ballots, while the streets of Rangoon, which the media fanfare had depicted as a carnival in the run-up to yesterday, were quiet.Footage filmed undercover (despite a less-than-convincing crackdown on journalists) showed patchy queues outside ballot stations, and voter turnout was thought to be no more than 60 percent. A bored looking Than Shwe joined his equally jaded second-in-command on the front page of the New Light of Myanmar, as they added their support to the ‘transition’ – perhaps years of rehearsals had finally taken their toll, as both appeared ready to collapse into the ballot box and make way for a new era of military rule. Predictably, the few results that have trickled out place the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) in the lead, with the pro-junta juggernaut given a head-start by its dominance of the one-party constituencies. Rumours that USDP candidate and Rangoon mayor Aung Thein Linn was pipped at the post by the opposition National Democratic Force (NDF) have been corrected, while Democratic Party chairman, Thu Wei, who pledged to pop the cork when the results came through, struck a sombre figure today as his loss was announced. It’ll likely take days before the official winner is declared, but don’t hold your breath – candidates are already reporting that the requisite box of advance votes at the foot of every voter counter is reversing any headway made by the opposition. China acted the counterweight to global condemnation of yesterday’s proceedings, with a leading state-run newspaper hailing the “step forward” taken by Burmese across the country, deaf as it was to the hundreds of complaints of fraud and intimidation that emerged. Barrack Obama’s prelude to the “illegitimate” vote was nothing new, and so top senator Mitch McConnell today urged the world’s most powerful man – who has been conspicuously quiet on the Burma issue – to do more. The disbanded National League for Democracy party continued to carry the torch for Aung San Suu Kyi, and unveiled a banner outside their Rangoon office yesterday in honour of the leader. “Only five days more,” it read, anticipating the 13 November release of The Lady, whose son, Kim Aris, remains in Bangkok wrestling for a visa. “They’re unpredictable, these people,” he said of the generals who have denied mother and son communication for a decade. “We’ll see what they’ll do.” Predictions that Burma’s border regions would erupt in violence materialised sooner than anyone could have guessed. A breakaway faction of the Democratic Karen Buddhist Army (DKBA) yesterday took advantage of a distracted junta and sent 1000 troops into Myawaddy, where fighting continues today. The site of a burning police station will concern family and colleagues of Japanese journalist Toru Yamaji, who was arrested in the town yesterday. Renegade leader Na Kham Mwe, who led the assault, said the surprise move followed allegations that Burmese troops were threatening voters at gunpoint, and more than 5000 refugees have now fled to Thailand, with more arriving. They are the first human results of yesterday’s game, and should be used as ammunition when regional neighbours, especially Thailand, emit their muffled echoes of China’s praise. “It is possible that it [violence] will carry on during the next three months, particularly during the transition from the current government to an elected government,” Abhisit said today, appended by his desire for “peace and order”. But, he added, Thailand will not “interfere in Myanmar’s [Burma] domestic affairs.” In that case, Japan deserves some praise, having broken the trend of silent Asian nations when it spoke of its “deep disappointment” with the polls. But back inside Burma, such sentiments may be wasted among the inured population, who have asked for help so often from the international community but been provided with little. As the listed air that settled over Burma yesterday suggests, expectations these days are nil; that it was only punctuated by gunfire in the east is perhaps even more telling. Travel independently to help Burma – Benedict Rogers The Guardian (UK): Mon 8 Nov 2010 The National League for Democracy’s lifting of the blanket tourism boycott is wise – it’s package tours that are problematic. Yesterday the people of Burma went to the polls for the first time in 20 years, and it is rumoured that democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi may soon be released. Neither of these events, however, represents meaningful change. The elections were a sham, designed to perpetuate military rule. Aung San Suu Kyi was excluded, her party banned and many voters disenfranchised. The decision last week by the National League for Democracy (NLD) to lift the blanket boycott to Burma should not, therefore, be read as any endorsement of the current situation. It is an important and intelligent change of tactics in the struggle for freedom. The NLD has chosen to target the tourism boycott on package tours, which generate more income for the regime and hide the truth about Burma. NLD Leader U Win Tin said: “We want people to come to Burma, not to help the junta, but to help the people by understanding the situation: political, economic, moral – everything.” But he added: “To have a very big cruise ship with hundreds of tourists coming in – that’s a lot of money for the regime, and so we don’t like such big business.” This is a view I have long advocated. I have traveled, as a human rights activist, inside Burma and along its borders more than 30 times. For me, the purpose of sanctions is to put pressure on the regime, not to isolate the country. Package tourism helps no one except the regime. Itineraries are approved by the regime, and it is almost impossible to have any meaningful interaction with Burmese people. Earlier this year, I watched French, German and Italian tourists get on and off buses in Rangoon, Bagan and Inle Lake, and for them it was just another town, another luxury hotel, another pagoda. I doubt they even knew about the daily suffering of the people. But I do believe that a certain type of travel is valuable. I have come up with a formula: independent, informed and intentional. If people are well-informed before they go to Burma about the human rights and humanitarian situation, if they travel independently and minimise the amount they contribute to the regime’s coffers, and if they go with the intention of not just having a holiday, but doing something to help, then it is worthwhile. People can help on the ground, by listening, learning and, when they have opportunity to do so, by giving, and upon their return home they can tell others, support campaigns and raise funds for humanitarian projects. So I welcome the NLD’s wise new policy: encourage those who want to learn and help to go, while targeting pressure on the package tours that help no one except the generals. It reflects the democracy movement’s broader approach of targeted sanctions and targeted engagement, and it is a formula that can help bring the change we all want to see. Burma elections: “attempt to consolidate authoritarian military rule” European Parliament: Mon 8 Nov 2010 Burma’s first elections in 20 years took place over the weekend with the poll being boycotted by the main opposition party and its leader, Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi. The election has drawn its fair share of criticism with the President of the European Parliament Jerzy Buzek saying before the poll that “these elections may go down in history as an attempt to consolidate authoritarian military rule in a civilian guise”.Speaking after the election Mr Buzek said that he “deeply regrets that the Burmese authorities failed to make these elections a step towards gradual democratisation. I am disappointed that the elections have not been inclusive, free and fair”. The last elections in 1990 were won by the National League for Democracy led by Suu Kyi. Burma’s military rulers annulled the result and Aung San Suu Kyi has been under house arrest in the capital Rangoon for most of period since then. In the wake of the crackdown, Burma’s people have suffered under the crushing weight of the military dictatorship which spends 40% of the country’s wealth of the armed forces and 1% on health and education. Validity of election questioned The National League for Democracy has dismissed the 2010 elections as an attempt to put a veneer of democratic legitimacy on the dictatorship (25% of the Parliamentary seats are reserved for Generals) and declined to take part. This gave the military the pretext to bar Suu Kyi as a potential candidate. The validity of the election has also been questioned by the EU’s High Representative for Foreign Affairs Catherine Ashton. Prior to the election she said, “elections in themselves do not make a country democratic. The EU regrets therefore that the authorities did not take the necessary steps to ensure a free, fair and inclusive electoral process”. Journalists on the spot have reported a low turnout and massive fraud. The head of Parliament’s delegation to Southeast Asia was also sceptical. German centre right MEP Werner Lang told us, “one cannot really talk of free and fair elections as several exiled media outlets reported that there seem to have been strong irregularities surrounding the elections”. He finished by saying that “these elections should not be overrated”. Aung San Suu Kyi released? One of the questions of the election and its aftermath is the position of Aung San Suu Kyi. Her House arrest is due to end on 13 November and the military government has said she will be released. Whether that promise is fulfilled or not remains to be seen as previous assurances of her release have not materialised. In 1991, one year after getting the Nobel Prize she was awarded the European Parliament’s Sakharov Prize for human rights. In his post-election statement President Buzek called for “the immediate and unconditional release of Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners. For the people of Burma/Myanmar and the whole international community Aung San Suu Kyi has been over the last 20 years a figure of hope, human resilience and political courage”. Declaration by the High Representative Catherine Ashton on behalf of the European Union on the elections in Burma/Myanmar Council on the European Union: Mon 8 Nov 2010
Turnout appears light in Myanmar’s election New York Times: Sun 7 Nov 2010 YANGON, Myanmar — Polling places appeared nearly empty around Yangon on Sunday as the rest of the city went about its business in the first election in this closed and tightly controlled nation in 20 years. The process was expected to cement military rule behind a civilian facade but also to open the door slightly to possible shifts in the dynamics of power. “It was an empty room,” said one voter who emerged from a polling place where he said he had spoiled his ballot in protest, here in the country’s commercial capital. Though the Constitution guarantees the military a leading role in the state apparatus, this will be the first civilian government in the former Burma since a military coup in 1962. With votes being tabulated locally, it was not known if results would be announced Sunday or later. The appearance of electoral legitimacy and civilian institutions may make it easier for Myanmar’s neighbors to embrace what has been a pariah, but it was unlikely by itself to ease a policy of isolation and economic sanctions among Western nations. Both President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton condemned the election Sunday. Speaking in Mumbai, India, the president said: “There are elections that are being held right now in Burma that will be anything but free and fair, based on every report that we are seeing. ” He added, “for too long the people of Burma have been denied the right to determine their own destiny. ” Mrs. Clinton, speaking in Melbourne, Australia, said: “You look at Burma holding flawed elections today that once again expose the abuses of the military junta.” In an hour’s tour of Yangon Sunday morning, there was very little sign on the streets or at polling places of a police or military presence. Half a dozen voting centers appeared almost empty and a resident of the country’s second city, Mandalay, said voting was light there as well. “None of my friends or family voted,” said a shopkeeper. “Aung San Suu Kyi is number one.” He was referring to the detained pro-democracy leader, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, whose party was not contesting the election and had called for a boycott. Voters were electing a 665-member, two-chamber national Parliament and 14 regional Parliaments. A total of 25 percent of those seats will be reserved for the military, and several senior military officials have resigned to run as civilians. Military officers are to head the key Ministries of Interior, Defense and Border Affairs, and the commander in chief of the armed forces will have power to take control of the country in times of emergency. Thirty-seven parties were on the ballot, but the military appeared to have taken pains to assure the victory of parties it supports by severely restricting campaigns, setting high fees for candidacy, censoring political statements, controlling the media, excluding voters in unstable ethnic minority areas and barring outside election monitors. Hundreds of the strongest potential opposition candidates were in prison or under house arrest. Each candidate was given 15 minutes on national television, but the censored, pretaped speeches had the feel of confessions at a Stalinist show trial. Speaking in Bangkok on Thursday, Britain’s ambassador to Myanmar, Andrew Heyn, said, “These elections are going to be neither free, nor fair, nor inclusive. There is nothing in these elections themselves that could give us grounds for optimism.” Kurt M. Campbell, the United States’ assistant secretary of state for East Asia and Pacific affairs, said in Washington in September that it appeared the vote would lack international legitimacy, but that it might create “new players, new power relationships, new structures inside the country” that would bear watching. The military appeared to be trying to avoid the pitfalls of the last election, in 1990, which it annulled after the party it backed was trounced by a democratic opposition led by Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi. In what could be the first sign of a backup plan if this election also did not go the military’s way, Myanmar’s state media, which has been urging people to vote, warned of the possibility of the election’s being “aborted,” in which case, it said, “the ruling government will have no choice but to keep taking state responsibilities until it holds another election.” Mrs. Aung San Suu Kyi, now 65, has been held under house arrest for most of the time since the past election. Her latest term of detention ends one week after the election, and the junta has hinted that she could be released. It has often made similar hints in the past, and there was no way to know what restrictions might be imposed if she is set free. Her party chose not to take part in what it called a sham election and was therefore forced to disband. Sunday’s elections are the first for a large share of voters. Anyone 37 or younger was not eligible to vote two decades ago. With half of the population of Myanmar 26 or younger, many voters seemed puzzled by how the process actually worked. Newspapers have run articles giving step-by-step instructions to voters, and many residents of Yangon have received fliers from candidates or seen the sparse collection of election posters. But in smaller towns and villages, where the vast majority of Myanmar’s estimated 53 million people live, some people anticipated confusion at the polls. A restaurant owner in Bago, the former royal capital 42 miles north of Yangon, said his staff of about dozen workers did not fully understand voting procedures. “I told them you have to tick a box and that’s it,” the owner said. Some voters said they were afraid to go to polling stations because they were intimidated by election officials and assumed that their names and choices would be recorded, he said. The election has also engendered more general fears of unrest among some families, with households hoarding rice and other staples, the restaurant owner said. But half an hour from Bago, amid the golden stalks of rice paddies ready for harvest, a family of farmers said they understood the system well after daily broadcasts on state radio instructing them on how to vote. The father knew the voting hours and how many candidates were running. Concerns about the overall fairness of the elections were widespread. Phone Win, an independent candidate running for a parliamentary seat in Yangon, said a major unknown in the election was the number of people, especially civil servants or police and military, who took part in advance voting. The actual vote counting was to be done with representatives of each candidate present, but pre-voting takes place out of sight of election officials, Mr. Phone Win said. He added that many people might stay away from the polls for a familiar reason in Myanmar. “People are afraid,” he said. * Seth Mydans contributed reporting from Bangkok. Diplomats snub election booth ‘tours’ – Dan Withers Democratic Voice of Burma: Sun 7 Nov 2010 European diplomats in Rangoon are rebuking offers to visit polling stations during Burma’s elections tomorrow, claiming the strict rules surrounding the inspections have forced them to withdraw. British, German, French and Italian diplomats yesterday issued a statement on behalf of the EU declining to take part in the visits, which British Ambassador Andrew Heyn earlier dismissed as a “choreographed tour”, AFP reported. Selected polling stations in Burma have been told to expect visits from diplomats and local representatives of international news agencies, while the majority of domestic reporters are banned from going within 50 meters of the ballot box. It was unclear at the time of writing whether representatives of other missions would be attending the tours. Foreign journalists and election monitors have been forbidden from entering the country to observe the polls, which critics claim are a cynical exercise aimed at putting a civilian facade on continued military rule. Burma’s election commission chief, Thein Soe, has said that the presence of foreign media is unnecessary when diplomats in the country could perform the same scrutinising function. He has also claimed Burma, which last held polls in 1990, has “abundant experience in holding elections”. Foreign representatives of international news agencies have been allowed to remain in the country, though they will be expected to accompany diplomats on the mandatory tours decried by Ambassador Heyn. Somsri Hannanuntasuk, director of election watchdog Asian Network for Free Elections (ANFREL), said she was unsurprised the diplomats were shunning the visits. “If I was them, I would decline too,” she said. Election observers needed full access to every aspect of the polling process, said Somsri, whose own organisation has been denied permission to observe the elections. “You have to understand the process and you have to have knowledge about observation. And you need freedom: freedom of movement, freedom of expression.” There have already been numerous accusations of electoral fraud in the polls, particularly with regards advance voting. Merely observing voting at selected polling stations would not allow observers to judge if elections were free and fair, Somsri said. Electoral irregularities rampant Irrawaddy: Sun 7 Nov 2010 The Burmese people, for the first time in 20 years, began heading to the polling stations on Sunday to cast votes for candidates from 37 political parties running for the new bicameral national legislature and regional parliaments. The polls opened at 6 a.m. Burmese local time. However, reports of electoral irregularities which began last week have increased. The Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) led by the incumbent Prime Minister Thein Sein has reportedly abused the electoral law with the help of local authorities and the election commissions at various levels. The Irrawaddy offers a briefing on electoral irregularities sent in by its reporters, correspondents, political party members and citizen voters. Ballot Stuffing: Ballot boxes in polling stations in Mandalay in Mandalay Division and Bogale in Irrawaddy Division were filled with advanced ballots. Unsafe Ballot Booths: The ballot booths at polling stations in Thanlyin, Ahlone, Kyemyindine, Sanchaung, South Okkalapa, Dagon Myothit (North), and Dagon Myothit (South) townships in Rangoon Division did not provide for a secret voting process. Faulty Voter List: Many voters in different townships complain that they have lost their right to vote because their names are not in the voter list. Unsealed Ballot Boxes: Many ballot boxes were not sealed or were secured only with plastic tape in Naypyidaw and Irrawaddy Division. Polling Station Officers’ Bias: Polling officers urged voters to vote for the junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) in Thingangyun, Thaketa and Kayan of Rangoon Division, in Thabeikkyin in Mandalay Division and in Kamma in Magwe Division. Illegal Campaigning: In breach of the election law, USDP members on Sunday morning told voters to vote for the USDP inside the polling station in Kawkalay village and Mudon Township in Mon State. In Rangoon’s Botahtaung Township, campaign posters for the USDP candidate were placed near the entry to the polling station, in breach of the electoral law which prohibits posters within 500 yards (457 meters) of polling stations. Party Members Interfer in Polling Station Functions: In breach of the election law, some USDP party agents assumed the role of polling station guards or were involved in the functions of the polling stations in Amarapura Township in Mandalay Division. Voting Cheating: Some polling station officers in Kyaukse Township in Mandalay Division cast votes for the USDP on behalf of the voters. Military family members ordered to re-do vote Irrawaddy: Fri 5 Nov 2010 Rangoon—The family members of navy personnel in Seikgyikanaungto in South Dagon District have been ordered to re-do their advanced votes after authorities inspected envelopes and found that many family members did not vote for the junta-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party. Many voted for the opposition National Democratic Force, sources said. Suu Kyi’s son seeks Myanmar visa to visit mother Associated Press: Fri 5 Nov 2010 Yangon, Myanmar – One of Aung San Suu Kyi’s two sons is seeking a visa to Myanmar to visit his mother for the first time in a decade, amid speculation the opposition leader will be freed from house arrest after this weekend’s election.Kim Aris, 33, lives in Britain and last saw his mother in December 2000. He has repeatedly been denied visas ever since by the government in military-ruled Myanmar. Suu Kyi’s lawyer Nyan Win said Friday that Aris was in the Thai capital, Bangkok, and was “trying to get a visa to see his mother on her release.” He did not say if Aris had already submitted the visa request to the Myanmar Embassy, which could not be immediately reached for comment. Myanmar will hold its first election in 20 years on Sunday and Suu Kyi’s latest detention expires shortly after on Nov. 13. The military junta has not confirmed if it will release her, but Suu Kyi’s inner circle says they are optimistic. “We all believe that she will be released by Nov. 13,” Nyan Win said. Sunday’s elections will be the first since Suu Kyi’s opposition party won a landslide victory in 1990 that the junta ignored. The fresh vote, which Suu Kyi’s party has been banned from taking part in, has been slammed internationally as a sham designed to cement military rule in the country. The 65-year-old Suu Kyi’s political struggle has come at great personal cost. She has been imprisoned or under house arrest for 15 of the past 21 years. She was first arrested in 1989 when her sons were 11 and 16. Her late husband, British scholar Michael Aris, raised their two sons in England. Their eldest son, Alexander Aris, accepted the Nobel Peace Prize on his mother’s behalf in 1991 and reportedly lives in the United States. Michael Aris died of prostate cancer in 1999 at age 53, after having been denied visas to see his wife for the three years leading up to his death. Suu Kyi could have left Myanmar to see her family but decided not to, fearing the junta would not allow her back in. The family has maintained a strict code of silence and does not speak to the media. Minority legislatures will mean little to the Burmese military The Nation (Thailand): Fri 5 Nov 2010 Within 90 days following the election on Sunday, Burma will usher in a new, if controlled, relationship related to the indigenous minorities in the country. For the first time in Burmese history, various minority groups will have seven “state” (provincial) legislatures in the seven minority-dominated areas of the country that will have the authority to deal with some aspects of local governance. This will match the seven “regional” (also provincial) legislatures in Burman majority areas. These fourteen provincial legislatures will supplement a bicameral national legislature, in which the minorities will also have significant representation. All national and local representative organisations will be subject to stringent military control, as active-duty officers will occupy 25 per cent of all seats in all such legislatures. This military presence and the leadership of the Tatmadaw (the armed forces) in governance have been called by the present head of state, Senior General Than Shwe, “discipline-flourishing democracy”. All adjectivally modified “democracies”, however, have questionable relationships to the term modified. In this complex attempt to ensure continuing military control over the society into the distant future, aspects of the loci of power still remain obscure. What will be – at the minority level, where insurgencies have plagued the country since independence in 1948 – the local relationship between the military and the minority legislatures? Burma is not only divided up into seven Burman states and seven minority divisions (as well as six subordinate minority areas), but it is also divided up into thirteen military commands, each of which has a military commander who has in the past twenty years been the effective control over his region. The relationship between the regional commander and the new state legislatures has not been spelled out in the constitution. The regional commands are not coterminous with the boundaries of the minority states. Many pro-government and some anti-government representatives will be elected in minority areas. In addition, many members of the senior officer class have been told to resign so they can run for office as civilians. Minority area legislators need not all be from minority groups, as in some areas significant numbers of the majority Burmans are also resident. But the chair of each of these state legislatures will not be chosen by the members of that legislature, but instead by the president of the Republic of the Union of Burma, who will either be an active-duty or retired military officer, or one very close to the military. So an important dilemma arises: Will there be eventual tension between the regional military commanders (who are all Burman) and the chairs of the local legislatures in their areas, some of whom may be minorities? The military command system is very strong in Burma, and power in the society is highly personalised; those members of the military who have retired under authority to run for various legislatures, and may be appointed as chairs of the local legislatures, may be more senior than regional commanders who have been recently assigned. In this case, the local legislatures may trump the regional military command, as the officer in the regional legislature may have out-ranked, or even have been a commanding officer, of the regional military commander. Even if this does not happen, then how will the exceedingly delicate problem of satisfying minority interests be resolved under this still obscure minority-military relationship? This complex set of hierarchical patterns is not a theoretical political science textbook issue. The present military junta has demanded that minority ceasefire troops be integrated into the national army as Border Defence Forces. To do so would effectively both castrate the minority capacity for insurrection, as the junta intends, or as a force to demand more local rights and autonomy, as some minority groups want. This new military configuration was to have been implemented before the election, but this has not happened and a number of deadlines have been passed, with the result that the new government will have to deal with a most contentious issue. Complicating these issues are the relations between the national bicameral Hluttaw (legislature) and the provincial ones, between younger and older and retired and active-duty members of the Tatmadaw, and the glass ceilings in the military and government for ethnic and religious minorities. The critical minority problems in Burma remain, as they have since independence, the most important and difficult dilemma facing all governments since that time. None of them have dealt with the issue effectively or in a manner to satisfy minority concerns. So although the new government may be inaugurated with great internal, military induced fanfare, the spectre of minority issues still looms on the horizon. David I Steinberg is distinguished professor of Asian Studies at School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University. His latest volume is “Burma: What Everyone Needs to Know.” Burma to build its first Special Economic Zone – Shirong Chen and Myo Tha Htet BBC News: Thu 4 Nov 2010 Burma has announced the setting-up of its first Special Economic Zone (SEZ), to be built in Dawei (Tavoy) township near the southern border with Thailand. Burmese state media said the zone would be developed around a deep sea port in Dawei, covering up to 64,000 hectares. Infrastructure development contracts were endorsed by the two governments to enable the construction of rail and road links with western Thailand. Burma’s SEZ may be similar to that of China, which has seen rapid growth. The Dawei SEZ will also have a hydro-electricity power plant, petrochemical and refinery plants, and upstream steel mills. The framework concession agreement on the project, signed between Italian-Thai Development (ITD) public company and the Burmese Port Authority, is worth Bt400bn ($13.4bn; £8.2bn). It is expected to be completed in 10 years. ITD will seek investment partners because the project is the largest in the company’s history, according to its senior executives. Many investors from South Korea, China and India have shown interest. Tight political control In September, the Burmese military leader, Gen Than Shwe, visited China’s SEZ in Shenzhen, and said his country would learn from China’s experience of economic reform and opening up. If it works out, it would be a concrete example of adoption of China’s development model, which encourages economic growth while maintaining tight political control. The Burmese authorities reached a deal with the Thai government in October but published the news on Wednesday, four days before a general election – perhaps as part of an effort to promote their credentials. In the country’s last election 20 years ago, the military rulers refused to hand over power to the winning party, the National League for Democracy, led by Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, who is currently under house arrest. Italian-Thai inks deals for huge Myanmar port project – Kochakorn Boonlai and Ploy Ten Kate Reuters: Thu 4 Nov 2010 Bangkok – Top Thai construction company Italian-Thai Development Pcl (ITD.BK) has signed a contract with Myanmar for a port and infrastructure project worth at least 200 billion baht ($6.73 billion).The framework agreement between Italian-Thai and the Myanmar Port Authority was endorsed in Naypyitaw, Myanmar’s capital, on Nov. 2, according to state media in Myanmar and a company source. The Dawei development in the Tanintharyi region in Myanmar’s south will take 10 years to complete under three phases of construction. The project covers construction of the deep-sea port, buildings for shipyard and maintenance work, petrochemical industries, a refinery, a steel plant, a power station, road and rail links from Dawei to Bangkok and an oil pipeline running alongside those transport links. A total of 25 vessels ranging from 20,000 to 50,000 tonnes would be able to berth simultaneously at the 22 wharves and 100 million tonnes of goods could be handled a year at the port. An area of 250 square kms (96.5 sq miles) has been designated to build two industrial zones. A power station that can generate 4,000 megawatts would also be part of the project. After two years of losses, Italian-Thai is expected to return to net profit this year, helped by new construction projects. The huge Myanmar deal will be a huge boost to revenue over a period of years, but some analysts were worried about how the company would fund it. “What we need to know is how they are going to finance it and whether they would need to raise funds. Its debt-to-equity ratio is now 4.0 times,” said Trinity analyst Vajiralux Sanglerdsillapachai. At the midsession break, Italian-Thai shares were unchanged at 5.40 baht, while the broad Thai index .SETI was up 1 percent. ($1=29.70 Baht) (Writing by Ploy Ten Kate; Additional reporting by Aung Hla Tun in Yangon; Editing by Alan Raybould) For some, Myanmar is ultimate frontier market – Jason Szep Reuters: Thu 4 Nov 2010 Bangkok – Asset manager Douglas Clayton calls it the ultimate frontier market: a country rich in natural gas, timber and gemstones strategically located between China and India with enormous potential for infrastructure. But as army-ruled Myanmar heads into its first election in two decades on Sunday, mainland Southeast Asia’s biggest country remains one of the world’s most difficult for foreign investors, restricted by Western sanctions, blighted by 48 years of oppressive military rule and starved of capital. Some investors expect the parliamentary election to change that by introducing reforms that could slowly prise open the country of 50 million people that just over 50 years ago was one of Southeast Asia’s most promising and wealthiest, the world’s biggest rice exporter and major energy producer. “It seems that the situation could not get much worse but has huge room to get better,” said Clayton, a former hedge fund manager who is now chief executive and managing partner of Leopard Capital, a private equity fund focused on emerging Asian markets and backed by overseas investors. “It has more natural resources than other frontier markets. It is basically four times the size of Cambodia. So the scale is attractive to people who deal in billions of dollars instead of millions,” he added. “The election is potentially a seminal event in changing the perception about Myanmar.” Most political analysts advise against such exuberance. Under the army-drafted constitution, the military has a 25 percent quota of all legislative seats and most of the remainder are expected to go to recently retired generals and their proxies running against minimal opposition due to tough election laws. The pro-army parliament would appoint a president responsible for the government. There’s no chance the election will be a catalyst for lifting Western sanctions, which depend more on whether the government releases an estimated 2,200 detained political activists or opposition politicians including Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, whose house arrest expires on Nov. 13. CIRCUMVENTING SANCTIONS But some U.S. and European companies are exploring how to navigate sanctions to get in early. “Recently we’ve seen companies mostly from Europe and the United States — not just the usual Chinese, Southeast Asian and Indian investors — looking to go in,” said a source at at a political risk consultancy who declined to be identified because he was not authorised to talk about clients. “They are approaching this in a way where they are willing to take a big of a hit on their reputation to navigate some of the political risks to simply be there, to get in there first. Telecommunications and construction materials companies, in particular, are interested, he said, noting the election, while widely dismissed as a sham, will create a framework for a democratic system that might yield changes in years ahead. “The perception is that, rightly or wrongly, Burma is about to open up in a big way,” he said. China, Thailand, India and Singapore are already big investors in Myanmar. Chinese companies poured in $8 billion from January to May, mostly in energy-related projects, according to official Myanmar statistics. India’s dominant state-owned oil explorer has announced it wants to invest in Myanmar’s gas fields, Thailand has ramped up investments, mostly in natural gas and infrastructure. The country’s proven gas reserves doubled in the past decade to 570 billion cubic metres, equivalent to almost a fifth of Australia’s, according to the BP Statistical Review. Revenues from those reserves are tightly held among the ruling military elite whose cronies dominate other businesses. “In the short term, it is not in anyone’s interest among the ruling elite to make big changes,” said Sean Turnell, an expert on Myanmar’s economy at Sydney’s Macquarie University. “There are deep, deep vested interests. And those vested interests will be trying to protect themselves.” CONTENDING WITH CRONIES Turnell points to the sale of about 300 state assets — from real estate, gasoline stations and toll roads to ports, shipping companies and an airline — that have been privatised, mostly this year, in highly opaque sales. As military brass swap fatigues for civilian clothes in the poll, the sales put major assets under their control via holding companies or through allies, turning the ex-military elite into the financial powerbrokers of a new era of civilian rule. Myanmar has also expanded its number of private banks ahead of the election to 19 from 15, but the four businessmen opening them are among the closest allies to the top generals. Turnell said tension among businessmen over who gets better favours could to lead to rifts and be an eventual catalyst for reforms, but he casts doubt on a theory circulating among investors that Myanmar will develop like Vietnam or Indonesia, where investment friendly policies thrived amid hardline rule. Myanmar has few technocrats and shuns outside advice, unlike Indonesia, for instance, where former president Suharto worked closely with U.S.-educated Indonesian economists known as the “Berkeley mafia” after coming to power in 1967. “There is the risk that companies are caught in a false dawn, but there could also be some opening up,” said Jacob Ramsay, senior Southeast Asia analyst at consultants Control Risks. “Instead of focusing on the illegitimacy of the election, it is time to start thinking about how the landscape could change, particularly if business gets involved.” Clayton at Leopard Capital is more bullish. “Everyone knows that fortunes will be made here once the sanctions are lifted and the economy opens up,” he said. (Editing by Robert Birsel) |
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
