By MIN LWIN
Win Tin, a leading member of Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), denied claims that he had said the party was divided over whether it would take part in an election slated for 2010.
Speaking to The Irrawaddy on Tuesday, Win Tin said that he was misquoted in a report by Deutsche Presse Agentur (DPA), which stated that he had told a visiting European diplomat that “some [in the party] want to participate [in the election] and some do not.”
“The NLD hasn’t considered joining the military-backed election in 2010,” he said.
“I told the Italian diplomat that there are two approaches in the NLD. Some, like me, reject the constitution outright, while some want to amend the constitution after parliament is convened,” he said, adding that he was referring to a parliament consisting of representatives elected in 1990.
Win Tin, who was released earlier this year from Rangoon’s notorious Insein Prison after serving 19 years, said that “throughout my prison life and since my release, I have rejected the junta-backed constitution.”
According to the DPA report, published on November 29, Attilo Massimo Ianucci, the Asia-Pacific chief of Italy’s foreign ministry, had urged the NLD to participate in the 2010 election.
“He said at present, the military occupied 100 percent of the government and after 2010, there would be only 25 percent. It is much better than the current situation,” Win Tin was quoted as saying.
In a statement issued on December 10 to the Foreign Correspondents Club of Myanmar, based in the former capital Rangoon, Win Tin reiterated that he has always rejected the junta’s efforts to write a new constitution through the military-backed National Convention, first convened in 1993. He said that he clearly stated his position on the matter in front of visiting US Congressman Bill Richardson and military intelligence agents while he was still in prison.
He added that he has always maintained three fundamental demands, summarized as “Suu Hlut Twe.”
“Suu” stands for the unconditional release of pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi and all other political prisoners; “Hlut” stands for the convening of the Hluttaw (the people’s parliament) with representatives elected in the 1990 elections; and “Twe” stands for dialogue between the military government and opposition groups.
December 31, 2008
Burmese Migrants Earning, Learning in Thailand
By SAW YAN NAING
A 56-year-old ethnic Shan migrant worker, Sam Htun, is typical of many Burmese who live in Thailand, grateful for the opportunity to work for a decent income.
“I feel my life in Thailand is more secure than in Burma,” he says. “In Thailand, it is easier to make a living.”
He lives in Chiang Mai, in northern Thailand, where thousands of Burmese migrant workers have gainful employment, enabling many workers to send money home to family and loved ones.
Sam Htun earns about 4,500 baht (about US $130) a month. In Burma, he earned 10,000 to 20,000 kyat (about $8 to16) per month. He never had enough money to get by, he said.
He now sends about 17,000 kyat (about $13) every month to his family in Taunggyi in Shan State in eastern Burma. He said he left Burma because he felt oppressed by Burmese authorities and because of the poor economy.
He is one of the hundreds of Shan migrant workers who stay at Kakanok 2, a Burmese migrant worker camp in San Kamphaeng in Chiang Mai Province.
The Kakanok 2 camp houses about 200 Burmese migrant workers, mostly ethnic Shan, who have legal work permits.
Most work in construction and have lived in Chaing Mai from three to eight years. A close knit community, they attend training workshops and hold ethnic celebrations on holidays and other occasions.
Much of the training is provided by a nongovernmental organization, the Human Rights and Development Foundation, which specializes on migrant labor rights.
The migrant workers have created their own worker rights group, the Migrant Workers Federation. On International Migrant Workers Day, December 18, they held a simple ceremony attended by about 200 migrants, guests and a few journalists.
When the ceremony started about 7 p.m, workers, children and elders gathered in a hall, looking happy and excited.
During the evening, there were question and answer games that served to educate workers about labor rights. For a correct answer, prizes were awarded.
“The ceremony is good because it educates migrant workers about their rights,” said migrant worker Sam Htun.
The chairman of the Migrant Workers Federation, Sai Kad, who organized the ceremony, said, “I’m glad when I see a lot of migrant workers come together and enjoy the evening. It makes me want to fight more for the rights of migrant workers.”
He said too many migrant workers still experience poor working conditions, and they didn’t know how to complain and demand compensation from employers if they are injured or denied wages.
“Before, they didn’t even know they were abused,” he said. “But they know now.”
A 26-year-old migrant worker, Sai Hla Woon, said, “I’m glad I came to this program. I learned something. We can rely on ourselves and help each other.”
“If I am mistreated now, I will go to the labor protection and welfare office,” he said.
A 56-year-old ethnic Shan migrant worker, Sam Htun, is typical of many Burmese who live in Thailand, grateful for the opportunity to work for a decent income.
“I feel my life in Thailand is more secure than in Burma,” he says. “In Thailand, it is easier to make a living.”
He lives in Chiang Mai, in northern Thailand, where thousands of Burmese migrant workers have gainful employment, enabling many workers to send money home to family and loved ones.
Sam Htun earns about 4,500 baht (about US $130) a month. In Burma, he earned 10,000 to 20,000 kyat (about $8 to16) per month. He never had enough money to get by, he said.
He now sends about 17,000 kyat (about $13) every month to his family in Taunggyi in Shan State in eastern Burma. He said he left Burma because he felt oppressed by Burmese authorities and because of the poor economy.
He is one of the hundreds of Shan migrant workers who stay at Kakanok 2, a Burmese migrant worker camp in San Kamphaeng in Chiang Mai Province.
The Kakanok 2 camp houses about 200 Burmese migrant workers, mostly ethnic Shan, who have legal work permits.
Most work in construction and have lived in Chaing Mai from three to eight years. A close knit community, they attend training workshops and hold ethnic celebrations on holidays and other occasions.
Much of the training is provided by a nongovernmental organization, the Human Rights and Development Foundation, which specializes on migrant labor rights.
The migrant workers have created their own worker rights group, the Migrant Workers Federation. On International Migrant Workers Day, December 18, they held a simple ceremony attended by about 200 migrants, guests and a few journalists.
When the ceremony started about 7 p.m, workers, children and elders gathered in a hall, looking happy and excited.
During the evening, there were question and answer games that served to educate workers about labor rights. For a correct answer, prizes were awarded.
“The ceremony is good because it educates migrant workers about their rights,” said migrant worker Sam Htun.
The chairman of the Migrant Workers Federation, Sai Kad, who organized the ceremony, said, “I’m glad when I see a lot of migrant workers come together and enjoy the evening. It makes me want to fight more for the rights of migrant workers.”
He said too many migrant workers still experience poor working conditions, and they didn’t know how to complain and demand compensation from employers if they are injured or denied wages.
“Before, they didn’t even know they were abused,” he said. “But they know now.”
A 26-year-old migrant worker, Sai Hla Woon, said, “I’m glad I came to this program. I learned something. We can rely on ourselves and help each other.”
“If I am mistreated now, I will go to the labor protection and welfare office,” he said.
The Stories We Missed in 2008
By AUNG ZAW
As I was preparing to take a break for the New Year, a Burmese colleague who has extensive sources in Burma walked into my office.
I knew this individual to be one of our most avid readers—and an unsparing critic who has often alerted me to the shortcomings of our coverage. But I also knew that he was uniquely well-informed and always constructive in his criticism, so I stopped what I was doing and braced for an earful.
“Your coverage on Burma this year was excellent,” he started. “Your reports on Cyclone Nargis, the referendum, political prisoners, women’s issues, tycoons—spot on! Superb!”
I thanked him on behalf of our hardworking staff, and explained how we started every morning with an editorial meeting to go over the stories and opinion pieces of the day and to discuss the content of the monthly print edition. He listened politely as I told him how pleased we were with the success of our Web site, which has been receiving astonishing numbers of visitors.
Then he started his criticism: “You claim to be an independent news organization searching for the truth, but this year you have failed to expose the reality of the exiled opposition.”
He said we didn’t write enough about the government-in-exile—the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB)—or the National Council of the Union of Burma (NCUB) and other umbrella organizations, and that what we did write was too soft.
“Several years ago, you wrote a good editorial about the NCGUB, but you no longer write this stuff,” he said.
I recall that editorial well. It questioned the effectiveness of the NCGUB under the leadership of its self-appointed prime minister, Dr Sein Win, cousin of detained democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi. Most Burmese exiles agree that Sein Win is a fine person, but they say that he is simply not articulate or media-savvy enough to be a good lobbyist for Burma’s democratic opposition.
My visitor pointed out that nearly a decade after we published our editorial, the NCGUB was still underperforming. Like many others, he noted that US officials in the Bush administration have shown little interest in meeting with the Washington-based NCGUB, preferring instead to establish contacts with rank-and-file activists living in exile in Thailand or the US.
“What about Maung Maung?” my visitor continued, referring to the general secretary of the NCUB. “You published some good articles about him last year, but you didn’t really follow up on them.”
In September 2007, at the height of the Saffron Revolution, Maung Maung upset many fellow exiles when he took credit for the monk-led uprising. My visitor was among those shocked by Maung Maung’s claims and their consequences for the pro-democracy movement.
“Maung Maung was quite effective when he was working on labor issues,” my visitor said. “Even the regime acknowledged his campaign.”
But, he added, Maung Maung undid much of the good he accomplished over the years when he made claims that undermined the credibility of exiled opposition groups.
“Do you know that the people who are now pushing hard for governments and aid groups to start sending money into Burma are using Maung Maung and the NCGUB to discredit opposition groups in exile? They are both doing a disservice to Burma and the democracy movement. Why can’t someone remove them?”
He added: “No one knows where Maung Maung lives or what he does. There is very little transparency.”
But, I argued, Maung Maung is not the only Burmese exile known to the outside world. There are others, like Bo Kyi from the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners—Burma, and Shan activist Charm Tong, who are widely recognized for their excellent work.
My visitor nodded. “I agree, but my point is that the ineffective groups and politicians are having a negative impact on the image of the movement.”
I couldn’t argue with that, and my visitor also sounded more conciliatory when the topic returned to The Irrawaddy’s coverage of the year’s events.
“I really liked your piece on Kyaw Myint,” he said, referring to a former Wa drug lord who is also known as Michael Hu Hwa. Kyaw Myint is now a businessman based in Vancouver, Canada, where he has also been using his money to recruit exiled activists to his newly formed political party.
This prompted me to mention that we have provided extensive coverage of ethnic issues over the past year. However, I had to confess my regret that we did not write in greater depth about the fate of Shan leader Hkun Htun Oo, who is serving a long sentence at a prison in Kachin State.
This wasn’t the only ethnic-related issue we had failed to cover, my guest insisted. “You don’t expose those ethnic groups that are just political opportunists who will take sides with whoever is in power in Burma,” he complained.
“What about some of the ethnic leaders in exile? I’ve heard that some of them are ready to get on the next plane to Rangoon—they’re just waiting for the visas.”
This was intriguing, but he didn’t divulge any details, so I said we would need more information before we could follow up on it. I told him that if we could confirm what he was saying, we would publish a full report.
He then turned his attention to another group: the so-called “third force,” consisting of Burmese and foreign academics who profess neutrality in the struggle between the junta and pro-democracy forces.
“I heard you received a lot of flack for your coverage of the EU Burma Day meeting in Brussels, where there was a lot of talk about the third force inside Burma.”
I responded that this was a touchy subject, but my well-informed friend wouldn’t let the matter rest there.
“You are always crowing about your investigative reporting and independent journalism, but you don’t even educate your readers about who the third force groups are—their shady backgrounds and who is behind them. It could be a real exposé. But your reports on them are just hit and miss.”
I told him that there are people now quietly monitoring what the third force and the “new opposition” groups are doing in Burma. I added that we would soon have some exclusive news to report on them.
“Don’t be shy about going after these opportunists,” my visitor said. “If you don’t demonstrate that you are watchdog, you will become just another lapdog instead.”
I wasn’t sure how to take this, but before I could let it sink in, my guest touched another nerve.
“By the way, have any of your donors threatened you because of your criticism of the UN and Ibrahim Gambari’s mission, or for questioning the value of humanitarian assistance to Burma as long as the junta still runs the whole show?”
I immediately came to the defense of our donor’s honor. “I swear to God, there has been no pressure from our donors—only expressions of respect for our work here. We are immensely grateful to them for respecting our editorial independence.”
He smiled at this, as if to show he understood what I really wanted to say. Then his look and tone became even more conspiratorial.
“I’m no Deep Throat, but I can tell you some things, if you’re inclined to listen.”
I nodded, and he began: “There are those who say that aid to border-based groups will soon be a thing of the past. They say that cutting off assistance to the troublesome exiles in Thailand is the only way to end the conflict in Burma.”
I immediately countered that no one could be stupid enough to believe such nonsense. I pointed out that many of the so-called “cross border” groups, such as the human rights organizations and the school projects and Dr Cynthia Maung’s clinic, were providing invaluable assistance to hundreds of thousands of people inside Burma—a fact that everyone acknowledges.
“But there are some donors and policymakers who are only too happy to ignore these facts,” he said. “On the other hand, if they hear something negative about the groups on the border, they are quite happy to pass it along.”
We discussed this sad state of affairs for a while, noting with disappointment that despite The Irrawaddy’s efforts to highlight the degree of cooperation between nascent civil-society groups inside Burma and exiled groups along the border, especially during the Saffron Revolution and Cyclone Nargis, this was a story that has gone largely unnoticed by the outside world.
We agreed that if anything good has come out of these two major crises, which struck Burma within a year of each other, it was that they served to strengthen the bond between Burmese inside and outside the country.
“But this cooperation is now in danger because some aid groups want to divide them,” said my visitor.
I told him to stop being so alarmist, and assured him that if I detected such a policy taking shape, I would be the first to report on it.
At this point, my guest decided to tackle another subject that he felt we had been remiss in covering over the past year.
“What about the National League for Democracy? Your editorials on Suu Kyi and the rest of the party’s aging leadership have been too soft. Why don’t you write about how they seem to be just hanging on for dear life, without doing anything to advance the country’s political situation?”
“They’re not just clinging to survival,” I retorted. “They’re waiting for Suu Kyi’s release and for the junta to begin a dialogue with them.”
“But dialogue is not going to happen. You know it, and so do they.”
Before I could say any more on the perennial subject of the regime’s lack of good faith and its stubborn determination to avoid an honest dialogue at all costs, my guest changed topics again.
“You criticize China every chance you get, but why don’t you mention India’s disgraceful Burma policy? Right now, New Delhi is calling for the international community to tackle the problem of terrorism in Pakistan, but they don’t seem to mind shaking hands with the terrorist regime in Naypyidaw. What hypocrites!”
Then he abruptly shifted to another subject that evidently filled him with indignation.
“Why don’t you write about prostitution in the Irrawaddy delta? I’ve heard that even sex workers are chasing after the aid money that’s making its way into the region,” he said.
“‘Follow the money.’ Isn’t that what you journalists say when you want to get to the bottom of some dirty business? You should be taking lessons from the sex workers.”
I thanked him for his suggestion, but I refrained from mentioning that our local stringers were not much good at chasing after money. In fact, they’re lucky to get US $250 a month from us, which is about all our donors are willing to allow for local staff inside Burma—even though they are facing 20-year prison sentences if caught working for The Irrawaddy.
All of this was becoming a bit depressing to think about, so I was glad when my guest decided he had offered enough criticism for one session. We exchanged New Year’s greetings, and he left me to my own thoughts.
It had been a challenging conversation, and it certainly made me wonder how we would ever live up to our readers’ expectations. But I vowed to myself that next year there would be fewer gaps in our coverage of Burma.
As I was preparing to take a break for the New Year, a Burmese colleague who has extensive sources in Burma walked into my office.
I knew this individual to be one of our most avid readers—and an unsparing critic who has often alerted me to the shortcomings of our coverage. But I also knew that he was uniquely well-informed and always constructive in his criticism, so I stopped what I was doing and braced for an earful.
“Your coverage on Burma this year was excellent,” he started. “Your reports on Cyclone Nargis, the referendum, political prisoners, women’s issues, tycoons—spot on! Superb!”
I thanked him on behalf of our hardworking staff, and explained how we started every morning with an editorial meeting to go over the stories and opinion pieces of the day and to discuss the content of the monthly print edition. He listened politely as I told him how pleased we were with the success of our Web site, which has been receiving astonishing numbers of visitors.
Then he started his criticism: “You claim to be an independent news organization searching for the truth, but this year you have failed to expose the reality of the exiled opposition.”
He said we didn’t write enough about the government-in-exile—the National Coalition Government of the Union of Burma (NCGUB)—or the National Council of the Union of Burma (NCUB) and other umbrella organizations, and that what we did write was too soft.
“Several years ago, you wrote a good editorial about the NCGUB, but you no longer write this stuff,” he said.
I recall that editorial well. It questioned the effectiveness of the NCGUB under the leadership of its self-appointed prime minister, Dr Sein Win, cousin of detained democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi. Most Burmese exiles agree that Sein Win is a fine person, but they say that he is simply not articulate or media-savvy enough to be a good lobbyist for Burma’s democratic opposition.
My visitor pointed out that nearly a decade after we published our editorial, the NCGUB was still underperforming. Like many others, he noted that US officials in the Bush administration have shown little interest in meeting with the Washington-based NCGUB, preferring instead to establish contacts with rank-and-file activists living in exile in Thailand or the US.
“What about Maung Maung?” my visitor continued, referring to the general secretary of the NCUB. “You published some good articles about him last year, but you didn’t really follow up on them.”
In September 2007, at the height of the Saffron Revolution, Maung Maung upset many fellow exiles when he took credit for the monk-led uprising. My visitor was among those shocked by Maung Maung’s claims and their consequences for the pro-democracy movement.
“Maung Maung was quite effective when he was working on labor issues,” my visitor said. “Even the regime acknowledged his campaign.”
But, he added, Maung Maung undid much of the good he accomplished over the years when he made claims that undermined the credibility of exiled opposition groups.
“Do you know that the people who are now pushing hard for governments and aid groups to start sending money into Burma are using Maung Maung and the NCGUB to discredit opposition groups in exile? They are both doing a disservice to Burma and the democracy movement. Why can’t someone remove them?”
He added: “No one knows where Maung Maung lives or what he does. There is very little transparency.”
But, I argued, Maung Maung is not the only Burmese exile known to the outside world. There are others, like Bo Kyi from the Assistance Association for Political Prisoners—Burma, and Shan activist Charm Tong, who are widely recognized for their excellent work.
My visitor nodded. “I agree, but my point is that the ineffective groups and politicians are having a negative impact on the image of the movement.”
I couldn’t argue with that, and my visitor also sounded more conciliatory when the topic returned to The Irrawaddy’s coverage of the year’s events.
“I really liked your piece on Kyaw Myint,” he said, referring to a former Wa drug lord who is also known as Michael Hu Hwa. Kyaw Myint is now a businessman based in Vancouver, Canada, where he has also been using his money to recruit exiled activists to his newly formed political party.
This prompted me to mention that we have provided extensive coverage of ethnic issues over the past year. However, I had to confess my regret that we did not write in greater depth about the fate of Shan leader Hkun Htun Oo, who is serving a long sentence at a prison in Kachin State.
This wasn’t the only ethnic-related issue we had failed to cover, my guest insisted. “You don’t expose those ethnic groups that are just political opportunists who will take sides with whoever is in power in Burma,” he complained.
“What about some of the ethnic leaders in exile? I’ve heard that some of them are ready to get on the next plane to Rangoon—they’re just waiting for the visas.”
This was intriguing, but he didn’t divulge any details, so I said we would need more information before we could follow up on it. I told him that if we could confirm what he was saying, we would publish a full report.
He then turned his attention to another group: the so-called “third force,” consisting of Burmese and foreign academics who profess neutrality in the struggle between the junta and pro-democracy forces.
“I heard you received a lot of flack for your coverage of the EU Burma Day meeting in Brussels, where there was a lot of talk about the third force inside Burma.”
I responded that this was a touchy subject, but my well-informed friend wouldn’t let the matter rest there.
“You are always crowing about your investigative reporting and independent journalism, but you don’t even educate your readers about who the third force groups are—their shady backgrounds and who is behind them. It could be a real exposé. But your reports on them are just hit and miss.”
I told him that there are people now quietly monitoring what the third force and the “new opposition” groups are doing in Burma. I added that we would soon have some exclusive news to report on them.
“Don’t be shy about going after these opportunists,” my visitor said. “If you don’t demonstrate that you are watchdog, you will become just another lapdog instead.”
I wasn’t sure how to take this, but before I could let it sink in, my guest touched another nerve.
“By the way, have any of your donors threatened you because of your criticism of the UN and Ibrahim Gambari’s mission, or for questioning the value of humanitarian assistance to Burma as long as the junta still runs the whole show?”
I immediately came to the defense of our donor’s honor. “I swear to God, there has been no pressure from our donors—only expressions of respect for our work here. We are immensely grateful to them for respecting our editorial independence.”
He smiled at this, as if to show he understood what I really wanted to say. Then his look and tone became even more conspiratorial.
“I’m no Deep Throat, but I can tell you some things, if you’re inclined to listen.”
I nodded, and he began: “There are those who say that aid to border-based groups will soon be a thing of the past. They say that cutting off assistance to the troublesome exiles in Thailand is the only way to end the conflict in Burma.”
I immediately countered that no one could be stupid enough to believe such nonsense. I pointed out that many of the so-called “cross border” groups, such as the human rights organizations and the school projects and Dr Cynthia Maung’s clinic, were providing invaluable assistance to hundreds of thousands of people inside Burma—a fact that everyone acknowledges.
“But there are some donors and policymakers who are only too happy to ignore these facts,” he said. “On the other hand, if they hear something negative about the groups on the border, they are quite happy to pass it along.”
We discussed this sad state of affairs for a while, noting with disappointment that despite The Irrawaddy’s efforts to highlight the degree of cooperation between nascent civil-society groups inside Burma and exiled groups along the border, especially during the Saffron Revolution and Cyclone Nargis, this was a story that has gone largely unnoticed by the outside world.
We agreed that if anything good has come out of these two major crises, which struck Burma within a year of each other, it was that they served to strengthen the bond between Burmese inside and outside the country.
“But this cooperation is now in danger because some aid groups want to divide them,” said my visitor.
I told him to stop being so alarmist, and assured him that if I detected such a policy taking shape, I would be the first to report on it.
At this point, my guest decided to tackle another subject that he felt we had been remiss in covering over the past year.
“What about the National League for Democracy? Your editorials on Suu Kyi and the rest of the party’s aging leadership have been too soft. Why don’t you write about how they seem to be just hanging on for dear life, without doing anything to advance the country’s political situation?”
“They’re not just clinging to survival,” I retorted. “They’re waiting for Suu Kyi’s release and for the junta to begin a dialogue with them.”
“But dialogue is not going to happen. You know it, and so do they.”
Before I could say any more on the perennial subject of the regime’s lack of good faith and its stubborn determination to avoid an honest dialogue at all costs, my guest changed topics again.
“You criticize China every chance you get, but why don’t you mention India’s disgraceful Burma policy? Right now, New Delhi is calling for the international community to tackle the problem of terrorism in Pakistan, but they don’t seem to mind shaking hands with the terrorist regime in Naypyidaw. What hypocrites!”
Then he abruptly shifted to another subject that evidently filled him with indignation.
“Why don’t you write about prostitution in the Irrawaddy delta? I’ve heard that even sex workers are chasing after the aid money that’s making its way into the region,” he said.
“‘Follow the money.’ Isn’t that what you journalists say when you want to get to the bottom of some dirty business? You should be taking lessons from the sex workers.”
I thanked him for his suggestion, but I refrained from mentioning that our local stringers were not much good at chasing after money. In fact, they’re lucky to get US $250 a month from us, which is about all our donors are willing to allow for local staff inside Burma—even though they are facing 20-year prison sentences if caught working for The Irrawaddy.
All of this was becoming a bit depressing to think about, so I was glad when my guest decided he had offered enough criticism for one session. We exchanged New Year’s greetings, and he left me to my own thoughts.
It had been a challenging conversation, and it certainly made me wonder how we would ever live up to our readers’ expectations. But I vowed to myself that next year there would be fewer gaps in our coverage of Burma.
December 30, 2008
Burma’s Bleak Prospect in 2009
By WAI MOE
All parties in Burma can expect 2009 to be a busier year than the one now ending as the country heads for a general election in 2010, with uncertainty and many more challenges to be faced.
The election will be the fifth stage of the seven-step “road map” to a system of “disciplined democracy” unveiled by the ruling generals in August 2003.
The year 2009 will be consequently quite exciting. The military junta, their cronies and proxy parties will be preparing for victory, applying various strategies to achieve that result.
According to the state-run media, Burmese government ministers and leading members of the regime-backed Union Solidarity and Development Association have been making field trips to rural areas, meeting with local people. These trips were seen as part of the preparations for the coming election.
However, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) said in a forecast for Burma that the military junta would face serious challenges ahead of the 2010 election, despite maintaining its firm grip on power in the next two years.
The EIU said the political scene in Burma would be volatile as the public held the military in intense abhorrence because of its handling of the Cyclone Nargis disaster and the military’s brutal suppression of the September 2007 demonstrations.
Diplomats at the UN also hope that democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi will be released from house-arrest in 2009. There are rumors that she could be freed as early as January, perhaps as a strategy to appease western governments and critics before confining her again in her home.
The EIU, however, doesn’t share those hopes or believe the rumors. It said in its December report: “There is little prospect that Aung San Suu Kyi will be released from house-arrest ahead of the election.”
In September 2008, the junta released Suu Kyi’s former associate, the veteran journalist Win Tin, after 18 years’ imprisonment.
After his release, Win Tin attempted to reorganize Suu Ky’s National League for Democracy (NLD). The party re-launched its regular weekly meetings of the Central Executive Committee – since 2003 these meetings had been held randomly.
He also held a regular roundtable called “Youth and the Future” at the party’s headquarters. Suu Kyi had previously participated in the discussions.
Win Tin also visited family members of political prisoners to offer moral support. This initiative, called the “White Campaign,” was previously carried out by the 88 Generation Students group led by prominent pro- democracy activist Min Ko Naing and former student leaders, most of whom are now in jail.
It is expected that the NLD will become more dynamic in 2009, and some party members expect reforms that will replace ageing leaders with younger people.
So far, however, the NLD has kept quiet about the election. It did call in September, though, for a review by the regime of the military-sponsored constitution.
Predicting Burma’s future is not easy, although the EIU said in its report: “Nevertheless, it is still unlikely that any attempt to overthrow the military would succeed, as the armed forces can be expected to remain vigilant and will crack down hard on any signs of gathering protest.”
It added that internal conflict is the most likely obstacle to smooth progress by the military in implementing its plans.
The health of junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe is a factor in the election run-up, the EIU suggests.
By making two trips within as many recent weeks to the cyclone-devastated Irrawaddy delta, Than Shwe has shown the world, however, that he’s in good health and that he remains firmly in control. Burma’s future thus remains as bleak as ever.
All parties in Burma can expect 2009 to be a busier year than the one now ending as the country heads for a general election in 2010, with uncertainty and many more challenges to be faced.
The election will be the fifth stage of the seven-step “road map” to a system of “disciplined democracy” unveiled by the ruling generals in August 2003.
The year 2009 will be consequently quite exciting. The military junta, their cronies and proxy parties will be preparing for victory, applying various strategies to achieve that result.
According to the state-run media, Burmese government ministers and leading members of the regime-backed Union Solidarity and Development Association have been making field trips to rural areas, meeting with local people. These trips were seen as part of the preparations for the coming election.
However, the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) said in a forecast for Burma that the military junta would face serious challenges ahead of the 2010 election, despite maintaining its firm grip on power in the next two years.
The EIU said the political scene in Burma would be volatile as the public held the military in intense abhorrence because of its handling of the Cyclone Nargis disaster and the military’s brutal suppression of the September 2007 demonstrations.
Diplomats at the UN also hope that democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi will be released from house-arrest in 2009. There are rumors that she could be freed as early as January, perhaps as a strategy to appease western governments and critics before confining her again in her home.
The EIU, however, doesn’t share those hopes or believe the rumors. It said in its December report: “There is little prospect that Aung San Suu Kyi will be released from house-arrest ahead of the election.”
In September 2008, the junta released Suu Kyi’s former associate, the veteran journalist Win Tin, after 18 years’ imprisonment.
After his release, Win Tin attempted to reorganize Suu Ky’s National League for Democracy (NLD). The party re-launched its regular weekly meetings of the Central Executive Committee – since 2003 these meetings had been held randomly.
He also held a regular roundtable called “Youth and the Future” at the party’s headquarters. Suu Kyi had previously participated in the discussions.
Win Tin also visited family members of political prisoners to offer moral support. This initiative, called the “White Campaign,” was previously carried out by the 88 Generation Students group led by prominent pro- democracy activist Min Ko Naing and former student leaders, most of whom are now in jail.
It is expected that the NLD will become more dynamic in 2009, and some party members expect reforms that will replace ageing leaders with younger people.
So far, however, the NLD has kept quiet about the election. It did call in September, though, for a review by the regime of the military-sponsored constitution.
Predicting Burma’s future is not easy, although the EIU said in its report: “Nevertheless, it is still unlikely that any attempt to overthrow the military would succeed, as the armed forces can be expected to remain vigilant and will crack down hard on any signs of gathering protest.”
It added that internal conflict is the most likely obstacle to smooth progress by the military in implementing its plans.
The health of junta leader Snr-Gen Than Shwe is a factor in the election run-up, the EIU suggests.
By making two trips within as many recent weeks to the cyclone-devastated Irrawaddy delta, Than Shwe has shown the world, however, that he’s in good health and that he remains firmly in control. Burma’s future thus remains as bleak as ever.
Nine NLD Members Arrested in Rangoon
By MIN LWIN
At least nine members of the National League for Democracy were arrested near the Parliament building in Rangoon on Tuesday while calling for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, according to NLD sources.
NLD members Tun Tun Win, Tun Tun Linn, Pyae Pyae Aung, Win Myint Maung, Min Thein, Kaung Htet Hlaing, Phyo Wai and Yeni Soe and Htet Htet Oo Wai were taken away by security police, sources said.
“While they were returning from Khin Maung Swe’s public talk at NLD headquarters, they held up posters with the message “Free Aung San Suu Kyi” and photographs of Aung San Suu Kyi,” said the NLD source.
When the group was close to the Parliament building, police cars appeared on the scene and members of the group were beaten and arrested, he said.
“They didn’t shout any messages or slogans,” he said. “They were demonstrating peacefully.”
On June 19, at least four members of the National League for Democracy (NLD) were arrested in Rangoon while they released sparrows and doves to mark the 63rd birthday of Aung San Suu Kyi.
Meanwhile, Burmese military authorities have transferred political prisoners, including student leaders, members of the 88 Generation Students and NLD members to remote prisons across the country, in an effort to place extra hardship on the prisoners’ family and friends.
Activist Htar Htar Thet, who conducted a hunger strike in prison two weeks ago, has been transferred from Pegu Prison in Pegu Division to Hkamti Prison in Sagaing Division.
At least nine members of the National League for Democracy were arrested near the Parliament building in Rangoon on Tuesday while calling for the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, according to NLD sources.
NLD members Tun Tun Win, Tun Tun Linn, Pyae Pyae Aung, Win Myint Maung, Min Thein, Kaung Htet Hlaing, Phyo Wai and Yeni Soe and Htet Htet Oo Wai were taken away by security police, sources said.
“While they were returning from Khin Maung Swe’s public talk at NLD headquarters, they held up posters with the message “Free Aung San Suu Kyi” and photographs of Aung San Suu Kyi,” said the NLD source.
When the group was close to the Parliament building, police cars appeared on the scene and members of the group were beaten and arrested, he said.
“They didn’t shout any messages or slogans,” he said. “They were demonstrating peacefully.”
On June 19, at least four members of the National League for Democracy (NLD) were arrested in Rangoon while they released sparrows and doves to mark the 63rd birthday of Aung San Suu Kyi.
Meanwhile, Burmese military authorities have transferred political prisoners, including student leaders, members of the 88 Generation Students and NLD members to remote prisons across the country, in an effort to place extra hardship on the prisoners’ family and friends.
Activist Htar Htar Thet, who conducted a hunger strike in prison two weeks ago, has been transferred from Pegu Prison in Pegu Division to Hkamti Prison in Sagaing Division.
New Year’s Event Spotlights Sexual Orientation Issues
By VIOLET CHO
RANONG — Burmese lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) migrant worker activists in Ranong used the New Year to organize a festival with the aim of fighting homophobia and raising issues related to LGBT rights through entertainment.
The festival was held on Monday and showcased traditional Burmese drama and dance with a fashion show and other modern performance forms. They also encouraged the broader community to participate through a “model boy” contest. The event combined traditional dancing with modern music to keep the audience of more than 1,000 people entertained.
The concert was organized by Rainbow, the first and only Burmese LGBT migrant organization in Thailand.
“It is a good chance for us to raise issues about LGBT rights through the wave of infotainment and edutainment,” said Htike Htike, the facilitator of Rainbow. “We have faced discrimination by the Burmese community, such as people telling us we lack ability, but then people come and see what we have done and they are smiling when they leave, which gives us a lot of encouragement.”
All of the organizers of the festival were Burmese LGBTs who came to Ranong for work and got involved with Rainbow. Rainbow was formed in 2006 and currently has almost 30 members, all of whom are LGBT.
As well as organizing performances, Rainbow provides training about LGBT rights and income generation for LGBT migrants, and raises awareness about HIV/AIDS. This is the third time Rainbow has organized a public festival.
“Every time people talk about gays, they think we have the lowest status. They think we are all hairdressers or betel nut sellers or natgadaw [“spirit wives” who participate in ritual marriages at nat shrines]. The space of gay people is really limited and people don’t recognize our power and creativity, so we need to organize ourselves and show what we can do,” said Htike Htike.
Burmese LGBT migrants routinely face discrimination from the Burmese community, such as sexual harassment and a lack of acceptance, sometimes from their own families.
“I have been looked down upon a lot as a lesbian. People think we are bad and carry diseases, so we get ignored and people stay away from us. It is lonely. But after I joined Rainbow and we did performances, I realized that people can understand me more and respect me more as a person,” said Su Su, the only lesbian member of Rainbow.
“Gay and lesbians need to work together and let people know that we are human beings,” she added.
RANONG — Burmese lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) migrant worker activists in Ranong used the New Year to organize a festival with the aim of fighting homophobia and raising issues related to LGBT rights through entertainment.
The festival was held on Monday and showcased traditional Burmese drama and dance with a fashion show and other modern performance forms. They also encouraged the broader community to participate through a “model boy” contest. The event combined traditional dancing with modern music to keep the audience of more than 1,000 people entertained.
The concert was organized by Rainbow, the first and only Burmese LGBT migrant organization in Thailand.
“It is a good chance for us to raise issues about LGBT rights through the wave of infotainment and edutainment,” said Htike Htike, the facilitator of Rainbow. “We have faced discrimination by the Burmese community, such as people telling us we lack ability, but then people come and see what we have done and they are smiling when they leave, which gives us a lot of encouragement.”
All of the organizers of the festival were Burmese LGBTs who came to Ranong for work and got involved with Rainbow. Rainbow was formed in 2006 and currently has almost 30 members, all of whom are LGBT.
As well as organizing performances, Rainbow provides training about LGBT rights and income generation for LGBT migrants, and raises awareness about HIV/AIDS. This is the third time Rainbow has organized a public festival.
“Every time people talk about gays, they think we have the lowest status. They think we are all hairdressers or betel nut sellers or natgadaw [“spirit wives” who participate in ritual marriages at nat shrines]. The space of gay people is really limited and people don’t recognize our power and creativity, so we need to organize ourselves and show what we can do,” said Htike Htike.
Burmese LGBT migrants routinely face discrimination from the Burmese community, such as sexual harassment and a lack of acceptance, sometimes from their own families.
“I have been looked down upon a lot as a lesbian. People think we are bad and carry diseases, so we get ignored and people stay away from us. It is lonely. But after I joined Rainbow and we did performances, I realized that people can understand me more and respect me more as a person,” said Su Su, the only lesbian member of Rainbow.
“Gay and lesbians need to work together and let people know that we are human beings,” she added.
Venue of Government’s Policy Speech Changed
By DENIS D. GRAY / AP WRITER
BANGKOK — Thailand's government was forced to change the location of its key policy speech on Tuesday as thousands of demonstrators loyal to exiled former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra surrounded Parliament, extending months of political turmoil.
The new government's core policies were to be unveiled at the Foreign Ministry where enough MPs had gathered to begin parliamentary proceedings, said Buranaj Samutarak, spokesman for the ruling Democrat Party.
The protesters, vowing to ring the Parliament building until their demands for new general elections are met, prevented the government from delivering the mandated speech on Monday. The government said it would try to peacefully end the blockade.
The standoff comes less than a month after the last government was forced from office following six months of demonstrations that culminated in the eight-day seizure of Bangkok's two main airports. The earlier protesters had been part of an anti-Thaksin alliance.
"I hope the prime minister can deliver the government's policy today. However, the government has strictly ordered police not to use violent force against the protesters.
We don't want to start our government's work with violence," Deputy Prime Minister Thaugsuban told local television stations.
One of the protest leaders, Chakrapob Penkhair, told The Associated Press that the demonstrators were not barring entry to the Parliament building.
"We still insist that the PM and parliament members should walk through us to get in. We guarantee their safety. By walking in, we can have a talk with him," he said.
The latest demonstration was peaceful except for some brief scuffles between protesters and police on Tuesday. But analysts say the continuing upheavals will further batter Thailand's virtually moribund tourist industry and other economic sectors.
"We will keep negotiating and mediating," Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva told supporters. "I beg everyone, including all the lawmakers and officials, to dedicate our (New Year) holiday for the country in order to move our country forward."
The third prime minister in four months, Abhisit was formally named prime minister Dec. 17 in what many hoped would be the end of months of turbulent, sometimes violent, protests. However, his party—which had been in opposition since 2001—heads a coalition that some analysts doubt is strong enough to last until the next general election in 2011.
His speech is expected to include details of a 300 billion baht ($8.6 billion) spending plan meant to jump-start the country's ailing economy and tourism, the No. 1 foreign exchange earner.
"There's no confidence among tourists who want to visit Thailand," said Prakit Chinamourphong, president of the Thai Hotel Association. "I just want to see the peaceful country without demonstrations so that the tourists will come back to Thailand again."
The current protest group—which calls itself the Democratic Alliance against Dictatorship and is known as the “red shirts”—is an eclectic mix of Thaksin loyalists, farmers from the countryside as well as laborers from the cities, including the capital Bangkok.
Thaksin, once one of the country's richest men, was ousted in a 2006 coup and remains in self-imposed exile.
Several thousand of his supporters converged on Monday on the street leading to Parliament, clapping and cheering as singers and protest leaders chastised the incoming government.
"We are here for democracy," said Narumol Thanakarnpanich, a 53-year-old university professor from Bangkok. "We want a new government."
They have demanded the new government dissolve the legislature and call general elections, which they believe would be won easily by the pro-Thaksin camp because of its strong rural support base.
The scene resembled events in recent weeks, when yellow-shirted protesters opposed to Thaksin first took over the prime minister's residence and then the two main airports. That group is aligned with Thailand's educated elite who viewed Thaksin's six years in power as deeply corrupt and a threat to their interests.
The sit-ins staged by both sides have shared the same relaxed festival feel, with security forces largely leaving the protesters alone.
BANGKOK — Thailand's government was forced to change the location of its key policy speech on Tuesday as thousands of demonstrators loyal to exiled former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra surrounded Parliament, extending months of political turmoil.
The new government's core policies were to be unveiled at the Foreign Ministry where enough MPs had gathered to begin parliamentary proceedings, said Buranaj Samutarak, spokesman for the ruling Democrat Party.
The protesters, vowing to ring the Parliament building until their demands for new general elections are met, prevented the government from delivering the mandated speech on Monday. The government said it would try to peacefully end the blockade.
The standoff comes less than a month after the last government was forced from office following six months of demonstrations that culminated in the eight-day seizure of Bangkok's two main airports. The earlier protesters had been part of an anti-Thaksin alliance.
"I hope the prime minister can deliver the government's policy today. However, the government has strictly ordered police not to use violent force against the protesters.
We don't want to start our government's work with violence," Deputy Prime Minister Thaugsuban told local television stations.
One of the protest leaders, Chakrapob Penkhair, told The Associated Press that the demonstrators were not barring entry to the Parliament building.
"We still insist that the PM and parliament members should walk through us to get in. We guarantee their safety. By walking in, we can have a talk with him," he said.
The latest demonstration was peaceful except for some brief scuffles between protesters and police on Tuesday. But analysts say the continuing upheavals will further batter Thailand's virtually moribund tourist industry and other economic sectors.
"We will keep negotiating and mediating," Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva told supporters. "I beg everyone, including all the lawmakers and officials, to dedicate our (New Year) holiday for the country in order to move our country forward."
The third prime minister in four months, Abhisit was formally named prime minister Dec. 17 in what many hoped would be the end of months of turbulent, sometimes violent, protests. However, his party—which had been in opposition since 2001—heads a coalition that some analysts doubt is strong enough to last until the next general election in 2011.
His speech is expected to include details of a 300 billion baht ($8.6 billion) spending plan meant to jump-start the country's ailing economy and tourism, the No. 1 foreign exchange earner.
"There's no confidence among tourists who want to visit Thailand," said Prakit Chinamourphong, president of the Thai Hotel Association. "I just want to see the peaceful country without demonstrations so that the tourists will come back to Thailand again."
The current protest group—which calls itself the Democratic Alliance against Dictatorship and is known as the “red shirts”—is an eclectic mix of Thaksin loyalists, farmers from the countryside as well as laborers from the cities, including the capital Bangkok.
Thaksin, once one of the country's richest men, was ousted in a 2006 coup and remains in self-imposed exile.
Several thousand of his supporters converged on Monday on the street leading to Parliament, clapping and cheering as singers and protest leaders chastised the incoming government.
"We are here for democracy," said Narumol Thanakarnpanich, a 53-year-old university professor from Bangkok. "We want a new government."
They have demanded the new government dissolve the legislature and call general elections, which they believe would be won easily by the pro-Thaksin camp because of its strong rural support base.
The scene resembled events in recent weeks, when yellow-shirted protesters opposed to Thaksin first took over the prime minister's residence and then the two main airports. That group is aligned with Thailand's educated elite who viewed Thaksin's six years in power as deeply corrupt and a threat to their interests.
The sit-ins staged by both sides have shared the same relaxed festival feel, with security forces largely leaving the protesters alone.
December 29, 2008
UN Offers Development Aid in Exchange for Political Prisoners
By WAI MOE
The United Nations has offered the Burmese military government a financial incentive to release the more than 2,000 political prisoners who languish in Burmese jails and initiate democratic change in the country, according to a Washington Post report on Sunday.
Regarded by many as the leading political broadsheet in the US, the Washington Post said that the UN is “trying to entice” the Burmese generals who rule the country “with fresh promises of development money.”
According to the report, UN Special Envoy to Burma Ibrahim Gambari presented the outline of his strategy in a confidential paper to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon last month.
In the paper, Gambari reportedly endorses building on the relations Burma established with the international community after the Cyclone Nargis disaster in May, as well as urging an increase in development assistance to Burma and recommending that wealthy countries allow Burma access to foreign investment.
“In the months ahead, the UN leadership will press the Obama administration to relax the US [sanctions] policy on Burma and to open the door to a return of international financial institutions, including the World Bank,” The Post said.
The report noted that the US and Britain have always resisted offering the Burmese regime financial perks, arguing that the junta should not be rewarded for bad behavior.
However, this would not be the first time that financial carrots have been offered to the Burmese junta in exchange for political development in the country.
In 1998, the UN and the World Bank offered the ruling military regime US $1 billion in financial and humanitarian aid in exchange for opening a dialogue with the opposition.
And in 2000, the UN offered the generals $1 billion again, this time to hand over control of the government to the UN.
Both times the junta turned down the offers, condemning them in state media as “bananas for monkeys.”
According to the Washington Post report, the UN had also opened discussions with Denmark, Japan, the Netherlands and Norway to find a way of preventing misuse of development assistance and ensuring that aid gets into the hands of the neediest Burmese.
Although economically one of the world’s poorest nations, military-ruled Burma last year exported some $2.7 billion in natural gas to Thailand. The junta also recently signed a 30-year deal to supply natural gas to China, which will build oil and gas pipelines from Burma’s Kyauk Pyu Port on the Bay of Bengal to its southwest Yunnan Province. The pipeline deal is reportedly worth $2.5 billion to the junta. Nevertheless, the Economist Intelligence Unit estimated Burma’s gross fixed investment to be no more than $10 billion this year.
Top UN officials, including Gambari, have urged China and India to lean on the Burmese military regime to release political prisoners and to provide a political opening for the opposition in the 2010 elections, The Post said.
The Washington Post also said that if the junta acts on Gambari’s new initiative positively, Ban Ki-moon would visit Burma again.
However, Gambari has also stated that he himself would not return to Burma until there were signs of political progress in the country.
He said that before returning to Burma there would have to be concrete results, such as the release of political prisoners and moves toward holding the 2010 elections in a free and fair manner.
According to diplomatic sources, Gambari has been criticized by Western countries for his ineffectiveness in Burma. Recently, Burma’s representative to the UN, Kyaw Tint Swe—writing in a confidential report that was leaked by the Burmese Ministry of Foreign Affairs—said that some Western countries have attempted to replace Gambari with someone who is “influenced by the West.”
But Gambari is still secure in his job, with support from Russia and Asian countries, Kyaw Tint Swe said.
There was no immediate response from the Burmese regime to the reported UN offer. However, Burmese state media constantly reprints messages urging Burmese citizens to “oppose foreign nationals interfering in the internal affairs of the State.”
The United Nations has offered the Burmese military government a financial incentive to release the more than 2,000 political prisoners who languish in Burmese jails and initiate democratic change in the country, according to a Washington Post report on Sunday.
Regarded by many as the leading political broadsheet in the US, the Washington Post said that the UN is “trying to entice” the Burmese generals who rule the country “with fresh promises of development money.”
According to the report, UN Special Envoy to Burma Ibrahim Gambari presented the outline of his strategy in a confidential paper to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon last month.
In the paper, Gambari reportedly endorses building on the relations Burma established with the international community after the Cyclone Nargis disaster in May, as well as urging an increase in development assistance to Burma and recommending that wealthy countries allow Burma access to foreign investment.
“In the months ahead, the UN leadership will press the Obama administration to relax the US [sanctions] policy on Burma and to open the door to a return of international financial institutions, including the World Bank,” The Post said.
The report noted that the US and Britain have always resisted offering the Burmese regime financial perks, arguing that the junta should not be rewarded for bad behavior.
However, this would not be the first time that financial carrots have been offered to the Burmese junta in exchange for political development in the country.
In 1998, the UN and the World Bank offered the ruling military regime US $1 billion in financial and humanitarian aid in exchange for opening a dialogue with the opposition.
And in 2000, the UN offered the generals $1 billion again, this time to hand over control of the government to the UN.
Both times the junta turned down the offers, condemning them in state media as “bananas for monkeys.”
According to the Washington Post report, the UN had also opened discussions with Denmark, Japan, the Netherlands and Norway to find a way of preventing misuse of development assistance and ensuring that aid gets into the hands of the neediest Burmese.
Although economically one of the world’s poorest nations, military-ruled Burma last year exported some $2.7 billion in natural gas to Thailand. The junta also recently signed a 30-year deal to supply natural gas to China, which will build oil and gas pipelines from Burma’s Kyauk Pyu Port on the Bay of Bengal to its southwest Yunnan Province. The pipeline deal is reportedly worth $2.5 billion to the junta. Nevertheless, the Economist Intelligence Unit estimated Burma’s gross fixed investment to be no more than $10 billion this year.
Top UN officials, including Gambari, have urged China and India to lean on the Burmese military regime to release political prisoners and to provide a political opening for the opposition in the 2010 elections, The Post said.
The Washington Post also said that if the junta acts on Gambari’s new initiative positively, Ban Ki-moon would visit Burma again.
However, Gambari has also stated that he himself would not return to Burma until there were signs of political progress in the country.
He said that before returning to Burma there would have to be concrete results, such as the release of political prisoners and moves toward holding the 2010 elections in a free and fair manner.
According to diplomatic sources, Gambari has been criticized by Western countries for his ineffectiveness in Burma. Recently, Burma’s representative to the UN, Kyaw Tint Swe—writing in a confidential report that was leaked by the Burmese Ministry of Foreign Affairs—said that some Western countries have attempted to replace Gambari with someone who is “influenced by the West.”
But Gambari is still secure in his job, with support from Russia and Asian countries, Kyaw Tint Swe said.
There was no immediate response from the Burmese regime to the reported UN offer. However, Burmese state media constantly reprints messages urging Burmese citizens to “oppose foreign nationals interfering in the internal affairs of the State.”
Political Prisoner Htay Lwin Oo Dies
By MIN LWIN
Burmese labor rights activist Htay Lwin Oo has died in Mandalay prison—the second political prisoner known to have died in Burma this month.
Htay Lwin Oo’s wife, Khin Hla Myint, told The Irrawaddy he had died on Sunday of tuberculosis, which she said had been left untreated by the prison authorities.
Htay Lwin Oo, a 46-year-old schoolteacher, was sentenced to seven years imprisonment in 2003 for his labor rights activities.
He was arrested along with 11 members of the National League for Democracy, who were sentenced to terms of imprisonment of up to 22 years for offences under section 5 (J) of the Emergency Provisions Act.
The Thailand-based Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma) called Htay Lwin Oo’s death murder. “Tuberculosis can be treated, but the government failed to treat him,” said Bo Kyi, joint-secretary of the association, the AAPP.
“There are quite a number of political prisoners facing death because of the government’s failure to treat them,” Bo Kyi said.
A 35-year- old political prisoner, Maung San, serving a two year prison sentence, committed suicide in Pegu Prison in central Burma earlier this month, reportedly because he was not getting proper medical attention.
The two deaths this month brings the number of political prisoners who have died since 1988 to 138, according to the AAPP.
Htay Lwin Oo’s funeral took place at Mandalay’s Kyarnikan cemetery on Monday. He is survived by his wife and an eight year-old son.
Burmese labor rights activist Htay Lwin Oo has died in Mandalay prison—the second political prisoner known to have died in Burma this month.
Htay Lwin Oo’s wife, Khin Hla Myint, told The Irrawaddy he had died on Sunday of tuberculosis, which she said had been left untreated by the prison authorities.
Htay Lwin Oo, a 46-year-old schoolteacher, was sentenced to seven years imprisonment in 2003 for his labor rights activities.
He was arrested along with 11 members of the National League for Democracy, who were sentenced to terms of imprisonment of up to 22 years for offences under section 5 (J) of the Emergency Provisions Act.
The Thailand-based Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma) called Htay Lwin Oo’s death murder. “Tuberculosis can be treated, but the government failed to treat him,” said Bo Kyi, joint-secretary of the association, the AAPP.
“There are quite a number of political prisoners facing death because of the government’s failure to treat them,” Bo Kyi said.
A 35-year- old political prisoner, Maung San, serving a two year prison sentence, committed suicide in Pegu Prison in central Burma earlier this month, reportedly because he was not getting proper medical attention.
The two deaths this month brings the number of political prisoners who have died since 1988 to 138, according to the AAPP.
Htay Lwin Oo’s funeral took place at Mandalay’s Kyarnikan cemetery on Monday. He is survived by his wife and an eight year-old son.
Pro-Thaksin Protesters Surround Thai Parliament
By DENIS D. GRAY / AP WRITER
BANGKOK — Thousands of supporters of exiled former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra ringed Thailand's Parliament on Monday, vowing to remain until the new government dissolves the legislature and calls general elections.
The demonstrators dared lawmakers to pass through their ranks to deliver a mandated speech outlining the government's key policies.
"If they (lawmakers) want to go in, they have to walk through us, including the prime minister," one of the protest leaders, Chatuporn Prompan, told reporters outside the Parliament compound where demonstrators spent the night.
The demonstration sparked fears of renewed political turbulence, which paralyzed the previous government for months and climaxed with an eight-day seizure of Bangkok's airports. But the earlier protesters had been part of an anti-Thaksin alliance.
The latest round of protests could further batter the nearly moribund tourism industry, the country's No. 1 foreign currency earner, along with other economic sectors.
The current protest group—which calls itself the Democratic Alliance against Dictatorship—said it would stay at Parliament until the government calls a snap election. The group had previously planned to stay for three days.
"We will celebrate New Year at Parliament," Chatuporn said.
The alliance has at least temporarily disrupted the government's plan to announce its policies, which by law it must do by Jan. 7. But legal experts say the government could argue for an extension because of the political turbulence.
Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban said if the announcement could not be delivered on Monday, attempts would be made to enter Parliament in the coming days—but through negotiations and not the use of force.
"We wish to deliver the policy statements before the end of the year," he said.
The protesters—dubbed the "red shirts" for their protest attire—say new Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his Democrat Party came to power this month through a virtual coup d'etat.
The court ruling that dissolved the previous government—which was packed with Thaksin allies—and led to Abhisit's selection as prime minister came under pressure from the military and other powerful forces, the group says.
Several thousand protesters on Monday camped out on the street leading to Parliament, clapping and cheering as singers and protest leaders chastised the incoming government.
Many wore red T-shirts with the slogan "Truth Today" and carried signs that described Abhisit as a dictator.
"We are here for democracy," said Narumol Thanakarnpanich, a 53-year-old university professor from Bangkok. "We want a new government."
The scene resembled events in recent weeks, when yellow-shirted protesters opposed to Thaksin first took over the prime minister's residence and then the two main airports.
The demonstration had the same relaxed festival feel, with security forces largely leaving the protesters alone. Families lounged on the pavement and vendors hawked grilled chicken, skewers of squid and ice cream.
Chatuporn said the protesters were not blockading the building but those who wanted to enter would have to get out of their vehicles and walk through their lines.
The Oxford-educated, 44-year-old Abhisit was formally named prime minister Dec. 17 in what many hoped would be the end of months of turbulent, sometimes violent, protests that had their roots in a 2006 military coup that toppled Thaksin.
Thaksin and his backers retain strong support in rural areas but have lost ground recently as former loyalists defected to join Abhisit's government, behind which the powerful military and monarchist figures have thrown their weight.
Thaksin no longer seems the prime mover in the country's political arena after being forced out of England where he sought exile, and facing probable imprisonment should he return to Thailand— although some still don't count him out.
Local media has speculated that Thaksin, once Thailand's richest man, has also taken heavy losses in the current financial crisis and no longer has the seemingly bottomless purse to support, and motivate, his backers.
Abhisit, the nation's third prime minister in four months, vowed in his inaugural address to reunite the deeply divided nation and to restore Thailand's tourist-friendly image. The eight-day airport shutdown battered the country's essential tourism industry and stranded more than 300,000 travelers.
Thailand's recent political convulsions began in August when anti-Thaksin protesters took over the seat of government to demand that Thaksin's allies resign. Since then, a series of court rulings have resulted in the ouster of two Thaksin-allied prime ministers.
In October, street clashes with police outside Parliament left two people dead and hundreds injured.
Military leaders accused Thaksin of corruption and ousted him in September 2006, keeping him in exile and controlling the country for an interim period until new elections in December 2007 brought Thaksin's allies back into power.
He returned to Thailand in February 2008 to face corruption charges but later fled into exile again and was convicted in absentia.
BANGKOK — Thousands of supporters of exiled former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra ringed Thailand's Parliament on Monday, vowing to remain until the new government dissolves the legislature and calls general elections.
The demonstrators dared lawmakers to pass through their ranks to deliver a mandated speech outlining the government's key policies.
"If they (lawmakers) want to go in, they have to walk through us, including the prime minister," one of the protest leaders, Chatuporn Prompan, told reporters outside the Parliament compound where demonstrators spent the night.
The demonstration sparked fears of renewed political turbulence, which paralyzed the previous government for months and climaxed with an eight-day seizure of Bangkok's airports. But the earlier protesters had been part of an anti-Thaksin alliance.
The latest round of protests could further batter the nearly moribund tourism industry, the country's No. 1 foreign currency earner, along with other economic sectors.
The current protest group—which calls itself the Democratic Alliance against Dictatorship—said it would stay at Parliament until the government calls a snap election. The group had previously planned to stay for three days.
"We will celebrate New Year at Parliament," Chatuporn said.
The alliance has at least temporarily disrupted the government's plan to announce its policies, which by law it must do by Jan. 7. But legal experts say the government could argue for an extension because of the political turbulence.
Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban said if the announcement could not be delivered on Monday, attempts would be made to enter Parliament in the coming days—but through negotiations and not the use of force.
"We wish to deliver the policy statements before the end of the year," he said.
The protesters—dubbed the "red shirts" for their protest attire—say new Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva and his Democrat Party came to power this month through a virtual coup d'etat.
The court ruling that dissolved the previous government—which was packed with Thaksin allies—and led to Abhisit's selection as prime minister came under pressure from the military and other powerful forces, the group says.
Several thousand protesters on Monday camped out on the street leading to Parliament, clapping and cheering as singers and protest leaders chastised the incoming government.
Many wore red T-shirts with the slogan "Truth Today" and carried signs that described Abhisit as a dictator.
"We are here for democracy," said Narumol Thanakarnpanich, a 53-year-old university professor from Bangkok. "We want a new government."
The scene resembled events in recent weeks, when yellow-shirted protesters opposed to Thaksin first took over the prime minister's residence and then the two main airports.
The demonstration had the same relaxed festival feel, with security forces largely leaving the protesters alone. Families lounged on the pavement and vendors hawked grilled chicken, skewers of squid and ice cream.
Chatuporn said the protesters were not blockading the building but those who wanted to enter would have to get out of their vehicles and walk through their lines.
The Oxford-educated, 44-year-old Abhisit was formally named prime minister Dec. 17 in what many hoped would be the end of months of turbulent, sometimes violent, protests that had their roots in a 2006 military coup that toppled Thaksin.
Thaksin and his backers retain strong support in rural areas but have lost ground recently as former loyalists defected to join Abhisit's government, behind which the powerful military and monarchist figures have thrown their weight.
Thaksin no longer seems the prime mover in the country's political arena after being forced out of England where he sought exile, and facing probable imprisonment should he return to Thailand— although some still don't count him out.
Local media has speculated that Thaksin, once Thailand's richest man, has also taken heavy losses in the current financial crisis and no longer has the seemingly bottomless purse to support, and motivate, his backers.
Abhisit, the nation's third prime minister in four months, vowed in his inaugural address to reunite the deeply divided nation and to restore Thailand's tourist-friendly image. The eight-day airport shutdown battered the country's essential tourism industry and stranded more than 300,000 travelers.
Thailand's recent political convulsions began in August when anti-Thaksin protesters took over the seat of government to demand that Thaksin's allies resign. Since then, a series of court rulings have resulted in the ouster of two Thaksin-allied prime ministers.
In October, street clashes with police outside Parliament left two people dead and hundreds injured.
Military leaders accused Thaksin of corruption and ousted him in September 2006, keeping him in exile and controlling the country for an interim period until new elections in December 2007 brought Thaksin's allies back into power.
He returned to Thailand in February 2008 to face corruption charges but later fled into exile again and was convicted in absentia.
UN’s ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ Won’t Work in Burma
By THE IRRAWADDY
This year we saw many twist and turns and ups and downs in Burma—but the tragedy of Burma seems to have no end in sight.
Early this year, the regime surprised the world by announcing that it would go ahead with a constitutional referendum implementing part of its seven point road map to prolong military rule. UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari accepted the proposal, while pushing for an independent monitoring body—but without considering the opposition parties’ stand, let alone the opinion of most people of Burma, who want to see regime change.
Political issues were swept away by the deadly cyclone that slammed into lower Burma in May, killing more than 100,000 people and making millions homeless.
The international community responded to the disaster with sympathy and offers of material aid. The US, Britain and France sent warships to the area, loaded with food, medicines and other supplies. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon toured the cyclone-flattened region and met leaders of the military government, urging them to allow more aid into Burma.
Not surprisingly, the junta opened the door slightly to aid agencies after dragging its heels on the dispatch of emergency relief to the cyclone victims.
At the same time, the regime went ahead with its sham referendum, claiming 92 percent approval for its proposed constitution.
Then, to the surprise of many, the regime launched its “shock and awe” strategy, handing out heavy prison sentences to prominent opposition leaders and humanitarian workers and sending them separately to remote prisons.
Now it is shocking to learn that Gambari has suggested that governments should offer Burma financial incentives to free its political prisoners, estimated to number more than 2,000—including Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi—and to initiate democratic change.
The Nigerian diplomat must be insane to think that the corrupt generals who terrorized the whole nation can be bribed into compromise.
The influential Washington Post has reported: “In the months ahead, the UN leadership will press the Obama administration to relax US policy on Burma and to open the door to a return of international financial institutions, including the World Bank.”
Several years ago, when the World Bank offered the Burmese regime US $1 billion in return for political reform, it was told, in effect: “Don’t give us bananas, we are not monkeys.”
Minutes of a meeting between Gambari and a UN Burma team led by Ambassador Kyaw Tint Swe—obtained by The Irrawaddy—seem to suggest that Gambari, a citizen of one of Africa’s failed states, is giving advice to some officials from a failed state of Southeast Asia.
The Irrawaddy reported that Gambari had told the Burmese team that if there was progress towards reconciliation in Burma before the new administration took office, Washington might modify its Burma policy.
The Washington Post, in its report, quoted the Nigerian diplomat as saying: “It cannot be business as usual. We need new thinking on how to engage with Myanmar [Burma] in a way that will bring tangible results.”
The UN, he said, cannot rely simply on “the power of persuasion with too little in the [diplomatic] toolbox.”
Gambari appears to be suffering from the “Stockholm syndrome”—held captive by the deceptions of the Burmese regime, he is in danger of succumbing to them. If he thinks that the UN and the international community can bribe the regime to free political prisoners and Suu Kyi, his understanding of Burma is indeed questionable. It clearly shows that the UN envoy is out of juice.
More dangerously, Gambari—snubbed by the regime and opposition leaders alike—appears to be deluded.
It cannot be business as usual to allow the UN and Gambari to work as normal on Burma. The UN’s engagement with the regime must be strictly monitored to ensure that it is transparent and accountable.
The Burmese generals must be laughing at Gambari and his proposal. The country’s political prisoners, however, have nothing to laugh about. They will be asking whether a more effective and better informed UN special envoy cannot be appointed.
Persuasion and bribes won’t move the captors of more than 2,000 innocent people.
This year we saw many twist and turns and ups and downs in Burma—but the tragedy of Burma seems to have no end in sight.
Early this year, the regime surprised the world by announcing that it would go ahead with a constitutional referendum implementing part of its seven point road map to prolong military rule. UN Special Envoy Ibrahim Gambari accepted the proposal, while pushing for an independent monitoring body—but without considering the opposition parties’ stand, let alone the opinion of most people of Burma, who want to see regime change.
Political issues were swept away by the deadly cyclone that slammed into lower Burma in May, killing more than 100,000 people and making millions homeless.
The international community responded to the disaster with sympathy and offers of material aid. The US, Britain and France sent warships to the area, loaded with food, medicines and other supplies. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon toured the cyclone-flattened region and met leaders of the military government, urging them to allow more aid into Burma.
Not surprisingly, the junta opened the door slightly to aid agencies after dragging its heels on the dispatch of emergency relief to the cyclone victims.
At the same time, the regime went ahead with its sham referendum, claiming 92 percent approval for its proposed constitution.
Then, to the surprise of many, the regime launched its “shock and awe” strategy, handing out heavy prison sentences to prominent opposition leaders and humanitarian workers and sending them separately to remote prisons.
Now it is shocking to learn that Gambari has suggested that governments should offer Burma financial incentives to free its political prisoners, estimated to number more than 2,000—including Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi—and to initiate democratic change.
The Nigerian diplomat must be insane to think that the corrupt generals who terrorized the whole nation can be bribed into compromise.
The influential Washington Post has reported: “In the months ahead, the UN leadership will press the Obama administration to relax US policy on Burma and to open the door to a return of international financial institutions, including the World Bank.”
Several years ago, when the World Bank offered the Burmese regime US $1 billion in return for political reform, it was told, in effect: “Don’t give us bananas, we are not monkeys.”
Minutes of a meeting between Gambari and a UN Burma team led by Ambassador Kyaw Tint Swe—obtained by The Irrawaddy—seem to suggest that Gambari, a citizen of one of Africa’s failed states, is giving advice to some officials from a failed state of Southeast Asia.
The Irrawaddy reported that Gambari had told the Burmese team that if there was progress towards reconciliation in Burma before the new administration took office, Washington might modify its Burma policy.
The Washington Post, in its report, quoted the Nigerian diplomat as saying: “It cannot be business as usual. We need new thinking on how to engage with Myanmar [Burma] in a way that will bring tangible results.”
The UN, he said, cannot rely simply on “the power of persuasion with too little in the [diplomatic] toolbox.”
Gambari appears to be suffering from the “Stockholm syndrome”—held captive by the deceptions of the Burmese regime, he is in danger of succumbing to them. If he thinks that the UN and the international community can bribe the regime to free political prisoners and Suu Kyi, his understanding of Burma is indeed questionable. It clearly shows that the UN envoy is out of juice.
More dangerously, Gambari—snubbed by the regime and opposition leaders alike—appears to be deluded.
It cannot be business as usual to allow the UN and Gambari to work as normal on Burma. The UN’s engagement with the regime must be strictly monitored to ensure that it is transparent and accountable.
The Burmese generals must be laughing at Gambari and his proposal. The country’s political prisoners, however, have nothing to laugh about. They will be asking whether a more effective and better informed UN special envoy cannot be appointed.
Persuasion and bribes won’t move the captors of more than 2,000 innocent people.
December 26, 2008
Canada-based Party Linked to Controversial Businessman
By THE IRRAWADDY
Burmese exiles were surprised to learn through an Internet newsgroup recently that the former chairman of the All Burma Students Democratic Front (ABSDF) has joined a new political party linked to a Canada-based businessman accused in the past of laundering drug profits for the United Wa State Army (UWSA).
According to widely read email messages circulating among Burmese exiles, former ABSDF chairman Htun Aung Gyaw recently joined the United Democratic Party of Myanmar (UDP), founded in Vancouver, Canada.
In response to the rumors, which include allegations that Htun Aung Gyaw, who is currently living in the United States, received US $50,000 to join the UDP, the party issued a statement saying that discussions between party leaders and the former ABSDF chairman were still at the “confidence-building” stage.
But the reports have raised further questions about the UDP itself. Burmese exiles living in Canada and the US say they don’t know what the party’s objectives are, and many wonder about the motives of the man seen as the driving force behind the party.
According to Burmese opposition sources in Canada, the UDP has no chairman, but is led by well-known Burmese businessman Kyaw Myint, a.k.a. Michael Hu Hwa.
Kyaw Myint’s company, NAH Development Group Inc, is involved in “energy, mineral, agriculture, building materials, finance and real estate industries,” according to its Web site, www.nahdg.com. The site also provides a contact address in Vancouver.
A former colonel in the UWSA—a group named by the US State Department as “the world’s largest armed narcotics-trafficking organization”—Kyaw Myint is a familiar name in Burmese business circles.
After the UWSA reached a ceasefire agreement with Burma’s ruling military junta in 1991, Kyaw Myint became the head of Myanmar Kyone Yeom Group, a Rangoon-based company with extensive interests in construction, mining, real estate and forestry.
In an article published by the now-defunct Asiaweek magazine in January 1998, Myanmar Kyone Yeom was accused of acting as a “money-washing machine” for the UWSA.
According to an article published in Jane’s Intelligence Review in November 1998, the company was blacklisted by the Burmese regime because “Michael Hu Hwa (a.k.a. Colonel Kyaw Myint), who claimed to be a deputy minister of finance for the UWSA, openly and brazenly flouted Burmese business laws and regulations.”
Soon after, the company was shut down and Kyaw Myint was imprisoned. He did not stay in prison for long, however, as he received help from some influential intelligence officers.
Kyaw Myint left Burma and appeared in Bangkok in 1999. From there, he relocated to the United States and then Canada—a move reportedly arranged by the US Drug Enforcement Administration.
He later set up United Democratic Party of Myanmar and began to recruit young activists, who received stipends and allowances, according to exiled Burmese sources in Vancouver. Kyaw Myint also reportedly financed some Burma-related conferences in Canada.
Burmese exiles were surprised to learn through an Internet newsgroup recently that the former chairman of the All Burma Students Democratic Front (ABSDF) has joined a new political party linked to a Canada-based businessman accused in the past of laundering drug profits for the United Wa State Army (UWSA).
According to widely read email messages circulating among Burmese exiles, former ABSDF chairman Htun Aung Gyaw recently joined the United Democratic Party of Myanmar (UDP), founded in Vancouver, Canada.
In response to the rumors, which include allegations that Htun Aung Gyaw, who is currently living in the United States, received US $50,000 to join the UDP, the party issued a statement saying that discussions between party leaders and the former ABSDF chairman were still at the “confidence-building” stage.
But the reports have raised further questions about the UDP itself. Burmese exiles living in Canada and the US say they don’t know what the party’s objectives are, and many wonder about the motives of the man seen as the driving force behind the party.
According to Burmese opposition sources in Canada, the UDP has no chairman, but is led by well-known Burmese businessman Kyaw Myint, a.k.a. Michael Hu Hwa.
Kyaw Myint’s company, NAH Development Group Inc, is involved in “energy, mineral, agriculture, building materials, finance and real estate industries,” according to its Web site, www.nahdg.com. The site also provides a contact address in Vancouver.
A former colonel in the UWSA—a group named by the US State Department as “the world’s largest armed narcotics-trafficking organization”—Kyaw Myint is a familiar name in Burmese business circles.
After the UWSA reached a ceasefire agreement with Burma’s ruling military junta in 1991, Kyaw Myint became the head of Myanmar Kyone Yeom Group, a Rangoon-based company with extensive interests in construction, mining, real estate and forestry.
In an article published by the now-defunct Asiaweek magazine in January 1998, Myanmar Kyone Yeom was accused of acting as a “money-washing machine” for the UWSA.
According to an article published in Jane’s Intelligence Review in November 1998, the company was blacklisted by the Burmese regime because “Michael Hu Hwa (a.k.a. Colonel Kyaw Myint), who claimed to be a deputy minister of finance for the UWSA, openly and brazenly flouted Burmese business laws and regulations.”
Soon after, the company was shut down and Kyaw Myint was imprisoned. He did not stay in prison for long, however, as he received help from some influential intelligence officers.
Kyaw Myint left Burma and appeared in Bangkok in 1999. From there, he relocated to the United States and then Canada—a move reportedly arranged by the US Drug Enforcement Administration.
He later set up United Democratic Party of Myanmar and began to recruit young activists, who received stipends and allowances, according to exiled Burmese sources in Vancouver. Kyaw Myint also reportedly financed some Burma-related conferences in Canada.
Earthquake Hits Ruili
By LAWI WENG
Nine people were injured when a 4.9 magnitude earthquake rocked the area around Ruili in Yunnan Province on the Burma-China border at 2:30 a.m. On Friday.
The Xinhua News Agency reported that two people had been seriously injured and another seven had been slightly injured.
According to sources in Ruili, local Chinese officials ordered schools closed as a safety measure.
Speaking to The Irrawaddy on Friday, a Burmese gem trader who is resident in Ruili, said, “People are very afraid. They are worried about their buildings collapsing.
“Luckily, my house was only a little damaged,” he said.
Frequent earthquakes in the China-Burma border region this year have raised concerns over the Burmese military government’s plans to build a series of mega-dams on the Irrawaddy River to generate electricity, said sources living in Laiza near the Chinese border.
Awng Wa, the chairman of the Kachin Development Network Group (KDNG), said people in Laiza are very afraid of earthquakes, because they often affect Kachin State.
In August, an earthquake measuring 5.3 hit Ruili, according to the US Geological Survey.
A joint inspection team from China and Burma are currently engaged in surveying the seven dam projects in Kachin State, which would generate an estimated 13,360 MW.
However, the region lies on an earthquake fault line that runs through China's Yunnan Province.
According to a KDNG report, “Damming the Irrawaddy,” one of the dams—the Myitsone dam—is located less than 100 kilometers (62 miles) from the fault line where the Eurasia and India tectonic plates meet.
In May, a massive earthquake hit Sichuan Province in western China killing an estimated 70,000 people.
Nine people were injured when a 4.9 magnitude earthquake rocked the area around Ruili in Yunnan Province on the Burma-China border at 2:30 a.m. On Friday.
The Xinhua News Agency reported that two people had been seriously injured and another seven had been slightly injured.
According to sources in Ruili, local Chinese officials ordered schools closed as a safety measure.
Speaking to The Irrawaddy on Friday, a Burmese gem trader who is resident in Ruili, said, “People are very afraid. They are worried about their buildings collapsing.
“Luckily, my house was only a little damaged,” he said.
Frequent earthquakes in the China-Burma border region this year have raised concerns over the Burmese military government’s plans to build a series of mega-dams on the Irrawaddy River to generate electricity, said sources living in Laiza near the Chinese border.
Awng Wa, the chairman of the Kachin Development Network Group (KDNG), said people in Laiza are very afraid of earthquakes, because they often affect Kachin State.
In August, an earthquake measuring 5.3 hit Ruili, according to the US Geological Survey.
A joint inspection team from China and Burma are currently engaged in surveying the seven dam projects in Kachin State, which would generate an estimated 13,360 MW.
However, the region lies on an earthquake fault line that runs through China's Yunnan Province.
According to a KDNG report, “Damming the Irrawaddy,” one of the dams—the Myitsone dam—is located less than 100 kilometers (62 miles) from the fault line where the Eurasia and India tectonic plates meet.
In May, a massive earthquake hit Sichuan Province in western China killing an estimated 70,000 people.
Rangoon Artist Paints the Naked Truth
By THE IRRAWADDYFat is beautiful—so says Rangoon artist Sandar Khaing, and to support that unconventional viewpoint she peoples her canvases with seriously overweight nudes. Sandar Khaing studied under prominent and experienced artists like Pe Nyunt Wai and Win Pe Myint, but now she has struck out on her own very individual path, giving the term “heavyweight” a new and aesthetic meaning.
About 40 of her striking paintings are on show in an exhibition, “The Naked Truth,” at the home in Chiang Mai, Thailand, of art enthusiast Loren Knutson. The Irrawaddy visited the exhibition and interviewed Sandar Khaing…
Question: Tell us how you came to paint nudes.
Answer: I started to paint in 1996 by hiring models. At that time, models were slim. I painted together with my teachers. Then I started to be interested in my elder sister's fatness and asked her to be my model. At first, she refused. Then she agreed. Since then, I have drawn fat people. I have about 60 paintings. Now I can make an exhibition here. All are painted with acrylic paint.
I started to paint with Nay Myo Say (one of Burma’s best known Burmese artists) by hiring a model once a week. Sometimes the model disappeared, I couldn’t find her and then I couldn’t paint.
When my elder sister came home from school, she used to be so tired and she would undress and rest. I asked her to model for me because I had nobody. I could only think about painting nudes, I wasn’t interested in any other kind of painting.
Even standing at a bus stop, I saw people in this way. I undressed people in my imagination. I didn't care whether the person was beautiful or not. I imagined it would be very nice to paint pictures of them, observing their body structure. I painted in my imagination. I observed everybody I came across—fat people, too.
It was very convenient for me when my sister became my model. I showed my portraits of her to my teacher, she liked them, said I was lucky to have such a model and encouraged me to continue. My sister still poses as a model for me. I don't let my mother know about it. My mother doesn't accept my work as paintings. And there are some difficulties about it inside the country.
Q: What feelings do you want to evoke with these paintings of plump, chubby and obese nude women?
A: I want to say that not only slim people but also fat people are beautiful. Fat women exhibit many more lines, and we can see beauty in these lines. There are double or triple stomachs, many ‘steps’ [of flesh] on their backs and their thighs, too. They are beautiful lines.
Q: Your exhibition also includes seven male nudes. What distinction do you make between male and female nudes?
A: The same. I feel the same. I just want to present lines, the beauty of lines.
Q: Have you exhibited in Burma?
A: Yes, at the French embassy about seven months ago. I sold six, to foreigners. I brought to Thailand about 40 paintings that I showed there. Small ones. It is not easy to exhibit these paintings, apart from in embassies. Even at home, I have to cover them up, otherwise my mother would scold me.
There are many artists who paint nudes in Burma. But they also have problems showing their work. I have about 25 large paintings, about 4ft by 5ft in Rangoon, which are difficult to exhibit because of their size.
Q: What other difficulties do you experience in painting nudes?
A: It is very difficult to find models. Most models are prostitutes. Although they are prostitutes, they are reluctant to sit before groups of three or four artists. They have never done this before. We have to explain that we are going to draw their beauty. We have to treat them like our family members. Later they understand. They say that they knew how to be a prostitute but not to be a nude model.
China Signs Burmese Gas Deal for 30-year Supply
By WAI MOE
The China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) has concluded a 30-year deal to buy natural gas from Burma, the Chinese Corp announced on Friday.
CNPC said in a press release that it signed an agreement with Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise, South Korea's Daewoo International, India’s Oil & Natural Gas Corp Videsh Limited and Gail (India) Limited in Rangoon on December 24.
The signing guarantees that energy-hungry China can fill a portion of its energy demand for nature gas from Burma’s offshore Blocks A-1 and A-3 in the Bay of Bengal for at least 30 years.
In the two offshore fields, South Korea’s Daewoo International Corp owns a 51 percent share; Myamar Oil & Gas Enterprise, 15 percent; India’s Oil & Natural Gas Corp, 17 percent; Gail, 8.5 percent; and Korea Gas, 8.5 percent.
At the end of 2007, Burma had an estimated 21.19 trillion cubic feet of nature gas reserves.
“Under the agreement, which cements a preliminary deal reached in June, pipelines will be constructed to export natural gas from Myanmar [Burma] to China's Southwest provinces,” CNPC said.
“Myanmar [Burma] will also be able to tap the pipeline running across its territory to promote economic development once the gas starts flowing, which is expected to happen in 2013.”
Analysts note that China had been competing with India, Thailand, South Korea and Japan for Burma’s nature gas.
Meanwhile, Burma’s state-run The New Light of Myanmar reported on Friday that Maj-Gen Htay Oo, the Burmese Minister for Agriculture and Irrigation, met with the new chairman of Daewoo International Corp, Jae Yong Kin, in Rangoon on December 25. Htay Oo is also secretary-general of the Burmese junta’s mass organization Union Solidarity and Development Association.
In early 2009, China is scheduled to build oil and gas pipelines from Kyaukpyu, a port on the Bay of Bengal, to its southwest Yunnan Province. China and Burma agreed to the US $2.5 billion pipeline project in November.
“The long-awaited China-Myanmar [Burma] pipeline is expected to provide an alternative route for China's crude imports from the Middle East and Africa and ease the country's worries of its over-dependence on energy transportation through the Strait of Malacca,” China Daily reported on November 19.
Analysts say China’s oil and gas pipelines through Burma to Yunnan Province and the up- grading of the Kyaukpyu Port is part of China’s two-ocean strategy in geopolitics, involving the extension of its influence in both the Pacific and India oceans.
“An outlet on the Indian Ocean would add a new dimension to China’s spatial relations with the world,” said Voon Phin Keong, director of the Centre for Malaysian Chinese Studies, in a working paper in April. “It would enable China to overcome its ‘single-ocean strategy’ and to realize what would constitute a highly significant plan for a ‘two-ocean strategy’.”
The move reduces China’s dependence on the Straits of Malacca and its exposure to potential risks, the scholar added.
Apart from China, Thailand is also a major buyer of Burma’s nature gas, purchasing at least US $2.7 billion in 2007.
The China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) has concluded a 30-year deal to buy natural gas from Burma, the Chinese Corp announced on Friday.
CNPC said in a press release that it signed an agreement with Myanmar Oil and Gas Enterprise, South Korea's Daewoo International, India’s Oil & Natural Gas Corp Videsh Limited and Gail (India) Limited in Rangoon on December 24.
The signing guarantees that energy-hungry China can fill a portion of its energy demand for nature gas from Burma’s offshore Blocks A-1 and A-3 in the Bay of Bengal for at least 30 years.
In the two offshore fields, South Korea’s Daewoo International Corp owns a 51 percent share; Myamar Oil & Gas Enterprise, 15 percent; India’s Oil & Natural Gas Corp, 17 percent; Gail, 8.5 percent; and Korea Gas, 8.5 percent.
At the end of 2007, Burma had an estimated 21.19 trillion cubic feet of nature gas reserves.
“Under the agreement, which cements a preliminary deal reached in June, pipelines will be constructed to export natural gas from Myanmar [Burma] to China's Southwest provinces,” CNPC said.
“Myanmar [Burma] will also be able to tap the pipeline running across its territory to promote economic development once the gas starts flowing, which is expected to happen in 2013.”
Analysts note that China had been competing with India, Thailand, South Korea and Japan for Burma’s nature gas.
Meanwhile, Burma’s state-run The New Light of Myanmar reported on Friday that Maj-Gen Htay Oo, the Burmese Minister for Agriculture and Irrigation, met with the new chairman of Daewoo International Corp, Jae Yong Kin, in Rangoon on December 25. Htay Oo is also secretary-general of the Burmese junta’s mass organization Union Solidarity and Development Association.
In early 2009, China is scheduled to build oil and gas pipelines from Kyaukpyu, a port on the Bay of Bengal, to its southwest Yunnan Province. China and Burma agreed to the US $2.5 billion pipeline project in November.
“The long-awaited China-Myanmar [Burma] pipeline is expected to provide an alternative route for China's crude imports from the Middle East and Africa and ease the country's worries of its over-dependence on energy transportation through the Strait of Malacca,” China Daily reported on November 19.
Analysts say China’s oil and gas pipelines through Burma to Yunnan Province and the up- grading of the Kyaukpyu Port is part of China’s two-ocean strategy in geopolitics, involving the extension of its influence in both the Pacific and India oceans.
“An outlet on the Indian Ocean would add a new dimension to China’s spatial relations with the world,” said Voon Phin Keong, director of the Centre for Malaysian Chinese Studies, in a working paper in April. “It would enable China to overcome its ‘single-ocean strategy’ and to realize what would constitute a highly significant plan for a ‘two-ocean strategy’.”
The move reduces China’s dependence on the Straits of Malacca and its exposure to potential risks, the scholar added.
Apart from China, Thailand is also a major buyer of Burma’s nature gas, purchasing at least US $2.7 billion in 2007.
Thai PM Proposes Economic Stimulus Package
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
BANGKOK — Thailand's prime minister said on Friday the government wants to spend 300 billion baht (US $8.7 billion) next year to jump-start the country's ailing economy.
Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said the economic stimulus package would include increased lending from government banks for agriculture projects and direct lending to local governments for infrastructure projects.
The plan must first be approved by Parliament, where Abhisit's coalition has a slim majority.
"The plan will be announced in January and the budget needs to be approved by the Parliament first and it is expected that the money could be injected (into the economy) from March or April," Abhisit told reporters.
The Thai government is desperate to help the country's ailing economy which the Fiscal Policy Office projected this week might grow by only 1 percent next year. It attributed the weak growth next year to a drop in domestic consumption and damage to the export sector from the worsening global economy.
The Federation of Thai Industries on Thursday told The Bangkok Post that it expects 1.1 million employees will lose their jobs by the second quarter of next year as a result of the slowdown.
On top of that, the tourism sector, a key engine of growth, is expected to suffer next year from the global slowdown and lingering effects from the shutdown of Bangkok's two main airports for a week last month by anti-government protesters. The tourism authority estimates the number of tourists will decline over the next six months by 2.5 million, costing the industry 100 billion baht ($3 billion).
Together, these factors could push the economy into a recession.
BANGKOK — Thailand's prime minister said on Friday the government wants to spend 300 billion baht (US $8.7 billion) next year to jump-start the country's ailing economy.
Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said the economic stimulus package would include increased lending from government banks for agriculture projects and direct lending to local governments for infrastructure projects.
The plan must first be approved by Parliament, where Abhisit's coalition has a slim majority.
"The plan will be announced in January and the budget needs to be approved by the Parliament first and it is expected that the money could be injected (into the economy) from March or April," Abhisit told reporters.
The Thai government is desperate to help the country's ailing economy which the Fiscal Policy Office projected this week might grow by only 1 percent next year. It attributed the weak growth next year to a drop in domestic consumption and damage to the export sector from the worsening global economy.
The Federation of Thai Industries on Thursday told The Bangkok Post that it expects 1.1 million employees will lose their jobs by the second quarter of next year as a result of the slowdown.
On top of that, the tourism sector, a key engine of growth, is expected to suffer next year from the global slowdown and lingering effects from the shutdown of Bangkok's two main airports for a week last month by anti-government protesters. The tourism authority estimates the number of tourists will decline over the next six months by 2.5 million, costing the industry 100 billion baht ($3 billion).
Together, these factors could push the economy into a recession.
December 25, 2008
UN Passes Strong Resolution on Burma Human Rights Abuses
By SAW YAN NAING
The UN General Assembly has adopted by a vote of nearly four to one a resolution calling on Burma to free all political prisoners, including detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, and criticizing the human rights record of the Burmese regime.
The resolution, which addressed the issue of human rights in Burma, was carried on Wednesday by 80 votes to 25, with 45 abstentions.
It urged the Burmese government to halt arrests of political activists and expressed concern about incidents of torture and sexual abuse and the crackdown on peaceful protesters in September 2007.
The resolution also voiced concern over the process of the junta’s so-called “seven-step roadmap” toward democracy, including the planned general election, noting the failure of the regime to include other political parties, members of Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy, and representatives of ethnic political organizations.
An unnamed Burmese UN representative later rejected the resolution and accused the UN Assembly of "blatant interference" in his country’s internal political affairs. He said that although Burma would not feel bound by the resolution it would nevertheless continue to cooperate with the UN and the Secretary-General’s good offices.
The Burmese representative maintained that his country had made major political strides and was now in the process of democratization by carrying out the so-called seven-step roadmap.
Four of Burma’s Asean partners—Indonesia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand—abstained in Wednesday’s vote, while Cambodia was not present. Brunei Darussalam, Laos, Malaysia and Vietnam joined China, India and Russia, together with countries ranging from Algeria to Zimbabwe, in voting against the resolution.
Burma’s top diplomat at the UN, Kyaw Tint Swe, said in a recent confidential report to his country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs that international pressure on Burma would increase within the UN Security Council, particularly from Western members. The envoy said Western influence within the Security Council would increase when Japan and Uganda replace Indonesia and South Africa in January.
Japan voted in favor of the resolution on Wednesday, while Uganda was not present for the vote.
In late November, Burmese junta chief Snr-Gen Than Shwe said in the state-run newspaper The New Light of Myanmar that the seven-step roadmap is the only way to smooth the transition toward democratic reform in Burma.
The fifth stage of the seven-step roadmap will be the general election, scheduled for 2010.
According to human rights groups, Burma has more than 2,100 political prisoners. About 215 political activists were sentenced last month to prison terms of up to 68 years.
The UN General Assembly has adopted by a vote of nearly four to one a resolution calling on Burma to free all political prisoners, including detained opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi, and criticizing the human rights record of the Burmese regime.
The resolution, which addressed the issue of human rights in Burma, was carried on Wednesday by 80 votes to 25, with 45 abstentions.
It urged the Burmese government to halt arrests of political activists and expressed concern about incidents of torture and sexual abuse and the crackdown on peaceful protesters in September 2007.
The resolution also voiced concern over the process of the junta’s so-called “seven-step roadmap” toward democracy, including the planned general election, noting the failure of the regime to include other political parties, members of Burma’s main opposition party, the National League for Democracy, and representatives of ethnic political organizations.
An unnamed Burmese UN representative later rejected the resolution and accused the UN Assembly of "blatant interference" in his country’s internal political affairs. He said that although Burma would not feel bound by the resolution it would nevertheless continue to cooperate with the UN and the Secretary-General’s good offices.
The Burmese representative maintained that his country had made major political strides and was now in the process of democratization by carrying out the so-called seven-step roadmap.
Four of Burma’s Asean partners—Indonesia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand—abstained in Wednesday’s vote, while Cambodia was not present. Brunei Darussalam, Laos, Malaysia and Vietnam joined China, India and Russia, together with countries ranging from Algeria to Zimbabwe, in voting against the resolution.
Burma’s top diplomat at the UN, Kyaw Tint Swe, said in a recent confidential report to his country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs that international pressure on Burma would increase within the UN Security Council, particularly from Western members. The envoy said Western influence within the Security Council would increase when Japan and Uganda replace Indonesia and South Africa in January.
Japan voted in favor of the resolution on Wednesday, while Uganda was not present for the vote.
In late November, Burmese junta chief Snr-Gen Than Shwe said in the state-run newspaper The New Light of Myanmar that the seven-step roadmap is the only way to smooth the transition toward democratic reform in Burma.
The fifth stage of the seven-step roadmap will be the general election, scheduled for 2010.
According to human rights groups, Burma has more than 2,100 political prisoners. About 215 political activists were sentenced last month to prison terms of up to 68 years.
Thailand’s Burma Policy Set to Change under New Premier
By WAI MOE
In a recent series of interviews with the international media, the new prime minister of Thailand, Abhisit Vejjajiva, has indicated that the Kingdom’s Burma policy is likely to involve a more proactive stance on human rights issues in the military-ruled country.
In an interview with the Qatar-based Al Jazeera news network, Abhisit said that he would try to convince fellow members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) of the importance of human rights to the international community.
Unless Asean’s efforts to enshrine human rights are credible in the eyes of the international community, “the grouping will not be able to achieve its objectives,” he added.
On Burma, Abhisit stressed the need for Asean and the West to find common ground.
“The West and Asean have a common objective. We want to bring good change in Myanmar [Burma],” he said.
Thailand’s new foreign minister, Kasit Piromya, has also indicated that the new administration would depart from the business-oriented polices that often determined the direction of the Kingdom’s Burma policy under recent governments.
Speaking at an academic conference on December 19, Kasit said that Thailand would now run “an ethical foreign policy,” in contrast to that of ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his hand-picked successors.
“From now on, there will be no personal business dealings on the side. This government will not mix business and politics,” he said. “We shall have no [personal] business deals with the [Burmese] junta; we shall observe human rights and environmental concerns; we shall treat Burmese as we do Thais.”
Before Abhisit became prime minister, he was also outspoken about Burma on several occasions. In September 2006, he told The Leaders, an online publication, that Asean recognizes that no problem can be considered a purely domestic problem, because any problem that occurs in a member state affects the whole association.
“Thailand and other Asean members should really push for an agenda that shows that we respect human rights and key principles upheld by the international community,” he said.
In another sign of Abhisit’s interest in the views of those calling for a stronger stand on human rights issues, on December 13, two days before he was named prime minister, he met with a number of exiled Burmese politicians at a conference in Bangkok.
It appears that Abhisit is set to follow the example of Thailand’s last Democrat prime minister, Chuan Leekpai, who did not visit military-ruled Burma during his administration from late 1997 to early 2001. Thai prime ministers usually visit Burma as a part of tour of Asean’s 10 member countries soon after taking office.
In 1999, during the Chuan administration, Burmese dissidents in Thailand staged a bold siege of the Burmese embassy in Bangkok, and early the next year seized control of a public hospital in the border province of Ratchaburi.
On the Burmese embassy capture, then Thai Interior Minister Sanan Kachonprasart said that he didn’t regard the attackers as terrorists, but rather as students who were seeking democracy in their homeland.
“They are not terrorists. They are students who fight for democracy,” said Sanan, who is returning to power as a deputy prime minister in Abhisit’s Democrat-led coalition government.
Thailand’s response to the embassy takeover—it defused the crisis by transporting the hostage takers to the border in a government helicopter—angered the Burmese generals, who closed all border checkpoints to Thailand and lifted Thai fishing concessions in Burmese waters without any prior notice.
Chuan’s administration also moved away from Asean’s policy of “constructive engagement” with the Burmese regime, when then Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan proposed in July 1999 that the bloc adopt a more proactive “flexible engagement” policy.
“Flexible engagement was about open and frank discussion about such issues [as human rights], leading to cooperative solutions—a pooling of sovereignty rather than its dilution, so as to make Southeast Asia a secure and prosperous region,” noted Amitav Acharya, an expert on international relations, in July 2007.
The Democrats’ approach to Burmese issues contrasts starkly with that of former Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, of the pro-Thaksin People’s Power Party. Samak visited Burma at least twice during his brief administration, which ended in September when a court decision forced him to step down.
Following a state visit in March, Samak returned to Thailand full of praise for the Burmese generals, describing them as devout Buddhists who practiced mediation and prayed every morning.
In an interview with Thailand’s Chanel 11, he even excused the regime’s brutal treatment of protesters: “Killings and suppression are normal there, but we have to know the facts,” he said.
In a recent series of interviews with the international media, the new prime minister of Thailand, Abhisit Vejjajiva, has indicated that the Kingdom’s Burma policy is likely to involve a more proactive stance on human rights issues in the military-ruled country.
In an interview with the Qatar-based Al Jazeera news network, Abhisit said that he would try to convince fellow members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) of the importance of human rights to the international community.
Unless Asean’s efforts to enshrine human rights are credible in the eyes of the international community, “the grouping will not be able to achieve its objectives,” he added.
On Burma, Abhisit stressed the need for Asean and the West to find common ground.
“The West and Asean have a common objective. We want to bring good change in Myanmar [Burma],” he said.
Thailand’s new foreign minister, Kasit Piromya, has also indicated that the new administration would depart from the business-oriented polices that often determined the direction of the Kingdom’s Burma policy under recent governments.
Speaking at an academic conference on December 19, Kasit said that Thailand would now run “an ethical foreign policy,” in contrast to that of ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and his hand-picked successors.
“From now on, there will be no personal business dealings on the side. This government will not mix business and politics,” he said. “We shall have no [personal] business deals with the [Burmese] junta; we shall observe human rights and environmental concerns; we shall treat Burmese as we do Thais.”
Before Abhisit became prime minister, he was also outspoken about Burma on several occasions. In September 2006, he told The Leaders, an online publication, that Asean recognizes that no problem can be considered a purely domestic problem, because any problem that occurs in a member state affects the whole association.
“Thailand and other Asean members should really push for an agenda that shows that we respect human rights and key principles upheld by the international community,” he said.
In another sign of Abhisit’s interest in the views of those calling for a stronger stand on human rights issues, on December 13, two days before he was named prime minister, he met with a number of exiled Burmese politicians at a conference in Bangkok.
It appears that Abhisit is set to follow the example of Thailand’s last Democrat prime minister, Chuan Leekpai, who did not visit military-ruled Burma during his administration from late 1997 to early 2001. Thai prime ministers usually visit Burma as a part of tour of Asean’s 10 member countries soon after taking office.
In 1999, during the Chuan administration, Burmese dissidents in Thailand staged a bold siege of the Burmese embassy in Bangkok, and early the next year seized control of a public hospital in the border province of Ratchaburi.
On the Burmese embassy capture, then Thai Interior Minister Sanan Kachonprasart said that he didn’t regard the attackers as terrorists, but rather as students who were seeking democracy in their homeland.
“They are not terrorists. They are students who fight for democracy,” said Sanan, who is returning to power as a deputy prime minister in Abhisit’s Democrat-led coalition government.
Thailand’s response to the embassy takeover—it defused the crisis by transporting the hostage takers to the border in a government helicopter—angered the Burmese generals, who closed all border checkpoints to Thailand and lifted Thai fishing concessions in Burmese waters without any prior notice.
Chuan’s administration also moved away from Asean’s policy of “constructive engagement” with the Burmese regime, when then Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan proposed in July 1999 that the bloc adopt a more proactive “flexible engagement” policy.
“Flexible engagement was about open and frank discussion about such issues [as human rights], leading to cooperative solutions—a pooling of sovereignty rather than its dilution, so as to make Southeast Asia a secure and prosperous region,” noted Amitav Acharya, an expert on international relations, in July 2007.
The Democrats’ approach to Burmese issues contrasts starkly with that of former Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej, of the pro-Thaksin People’s Power Party. Samak visited Burma at least twice during his brief administration, which ended in September when a court decision forced him to step down.
Following a state visit in March, Samak returned to Thailand full of praise for the Burmese generals, describing them as devout Buddhists who practiced mediation and prayed every morning.
In an interview with Thailand’s Chanel 11, he even excused the regime’s brutal treatment of protesters: “Killings and suppression are normal there, but we have to know the facts,” he said.
Tsunami Still Haunts Burmese Migrants
By LAWI WENG
Hundreds of Burmese tsunami survivors—who are still migrant workers in Thailand, four years after almost losing their lives—are still fearful of another killer wave, according to NGO staff in the Phang Nga district of southern Thailand.
Speaking to The Irrawaddy on Thursday, Htoo Chit, the coordinator of Grassroots Human Rights Education and Development Committee (Burma), said, “Survivors are still afraid that another tsunami is imminent. A guy called me one time at 2 a.m. for help.
He and his colleagues had climbed to higher ground above a rubber plantation convinced that a tsunami was coming.”
According to Grassroots Human Rights Education and Development Committee (Burma), there are about 10,000 Burmese workers currently working in Phang Nga—mainly on construction sites, fishing boats and rubber plantations.
Authorities in the Phuket area have set up a tsunami warning system, which can be broadcast in different languages. However, there is no Burmese-language warning.
Some Burmese workers, not understanding an announcement, have been known to run for cover, he said.
The deputy director of the Grassroots Human Rights Education and Development Committee (Burma), Po Po, said that in February she had to drive out and pick up Burmese migrants who had fled to a mountain three kilometers away out of fear of an impending disaster.
“Even four years after the event, some people still cannot talk about the tsunami,” she said. “They just break down in tears.”
Tsunami survivor Achai, 30, a migrant Burmese who today works on a construction site earning 203 baht (US $5.60) per day, said, “I lost ten friends in the tsunami.
“I was by the beach on a construction site. Suddenly, I saw a huge wave coming. I ran into the building. I escaped by about two seconds. My other 10 friends got taken by the wave.”
Lyi Mong, a tsunami survivor from Mudon in Mon State, said that Burmese victims didn’t get any assistance from the Thai government. “Only Thai people got financial aid,” she said. “Some got new houses and have come out of it even better than before the tsunami.”
The 26 December 2004 tsunami is described as one of the worst natural disasters in the history of mankind. It killed an estimated 280,000 people.
In Thailand, the official number of people killed or missing stands at 8,212. Some 388 bodies remain unidentified, many of whom could well be Burmese, say Thai officials.
Hundreds of Burmese tsunami survivors—who are still migrant workers in Thailand, four years after almost losing their lives—are still fearful of another killer wave, according to NGO staff in the Phang Nga district of southern Thailand.
Speaking to The Irrawaddy on Thursday, Htoo Chit, the coordinator of Grassroots Human Rights Education and Development Committee (Burma), said, “Survivors are still afraid that another tsunami is imminent. A guy called me one time at 2 a.m. for help.
He and his colleagues had climbed to higher ground above a rubber plantation convinced that a tsunami was coming.”
According to Grassroots Human Rights Education and Development Committee (Burma), there are about 10,000 Burmese workers currently working in Phang Nga—mainly on construction sites, fishing boats and rubber plantations.
Authorities in the Phuket area have set up a tsunami warning system, which can be broadcast in different languages. However, there is no Burmese-language warning.
Some Burmese workers, not understanding an announcement, have been known to run for cover, he said.
The deputy director of the Grassroots Human Rights Education and Development Committee (Burma), Po Po, said that in February she had to drive out and pick up Burmese migrants who had fled to a mountain three kilometers away out of fear of an impending disaster.
“Even four years after the event, some people still cannot talk about the tsunami,” she said. “They just break down in tears.”
Tsunami survivor Achai, 30, a migrant Burmese who today works on a construction site earning 203 baht (US $5.60) per day, said, “I lost ten friends in the tsunami.
“I was by the beach on a construction site. Suddenly, I saw a huge wave coming. I ran into the building. I escaped by about two seconds. My other 10 friends got taken by the wave.”
Lyi Mong, a tsunami survivor from Mudon in Mon State, said that Burmese victims didn’t get any assistance from the Thai government. “Only Thai people got financial aid,” she said. “Some got new houses and have come out of it even better than before the tsunami.”
The 26 December 2004 tsunami is described as one of the worst natural disasters in the history of mankind. It killed an estimated 280,000 people.
In Thailand, the official number of people killed or missing stands at 8,212. Some 388 bodies remain unidentified, many of whom could well be Burmese, say Thai officials.
Than Shwe, Voodoo and the Number 11
By AUNG ZAW
Whenever I speak to diplomats or foreign friends who want to learn more about Burma, I encourage them to draw parallels between the political decisions in the country and astrology, or moreover, yadaya, the Burmese form of voodoo.
It is an open secret that Burma’s military leaders believe deeply in various superstitions—astrology, occultism, numerology, black magic, yadaya.
Throughout our recent history, auspicious dates, times, units of currency and countless other properties have been reset according to the advice of the junta leaders’ astrologers.
During the era of Gen Ne Win, the number 9 became the satanic mark of the regime. Even the national currency was altered to denominations of nine, with 45-kyat and 90-kyat notes suddenly, and without warning, circulated in place of the existing currency.
As 2009 draws near, many observers inside and outside the country have been amused to find out that the new symbol of power for the paranoid generals of Naypyidaw has been unveiled as the number 11.
Though speculation is rife, no one knows for sure how or why 11 suddenly became the military government’s talisman.
In September, the regime released 9,002 prisoners. Of course, 9002 inverted becomes 2009, so I was intrigued as to whether this seemingly random number had been manipulated.
I approached an exiled former astrologer of the junta’s top brass and asked him if there was some superstitious meaning behind it.
He told me that the number of released prisoners quoted in the Burmese press was never the true figure; it could be a few dozen prisoners, it could be hundreds. But the number quoted was always consistent with the advice of an astrologer.
We mused on the fact that the total sum of the digits in 9002 is 11 (9+2).
Shortly after, the Burmese authorities began sentencing prominent pro-democracy activists. The numerology was consistent—several dissidents, including Min Ko Naing, for years one of the greatest thorns in the junta’s side, were in November (the 11th month) handed down sentences of 65 years (6+5=11). To hammer the point home, the sentences were pronounced at 11am.
Was an astrologer consulted before these judicial decisions were made? “Absolutely!” the exiled astrologer told me.
“So enlighten me!” I beseeched him. “Why 11?”
He reminded me that in Burmese Buddhist tradition, there are “eleven fires”— greed, hatred, delusion, birth, aging, death, grief, lamentation, pain, sorrow and despair—which, in a spiritual context, are fueled by sentient attachment.
So, I was left to wonder, are the generals trying to prevent the “eleven fires” from befalling them? Surely, the generals are aware that under their rule, the people of Burma need not be reminded about the fires of suffering?
We know that both former and current military leaders have practiced yadaya to ward off misfortune and that many have had private astrologers on their staff.
When Ne Win was in power, one of his aides, Sein Lwin, who was president of Burma for two weeks during the turbulent summer of 1988, regularly consulted astrologers to foresee the future.
In some cases Sein Lwin—known forevermore as “The Butcher of Rangoon” after he ordered a bloody crackdown on unarmed protesters—would even meet his official astrologers to seek assurance of who would fill the top cabinet positions whenever Ne Win purged one of his top brass.
Apart from official astrologers, Burma’s military leaders usually keep close to their sides any Buddhist monks who are well-known for reading palms and predicting the future.
In 2002, Ne Win’s grandsons were arrested for planning an overthrow of the government. Aung Pwint Khaung, the dictator’s family astrologer, was also detained. The raid evidently uncovered a cache of voodoo-like dolls said to closely resemble the regime’s top three generals—Snr-Gen Than Shwe, Gen Maung Aye and Gen Khin Nyunt.
A similar situation unfolded in 2004 when astrologer Bodaw Than Hla was arrested along with his patron, Khin Nyunt. Both were thrown in prison. Although Khin Nyunt remains under house arrest, to this day rumors circulate that the former spy chief still seeks advice from astrologers via a messenger. Word has it that Khin Nyunt is obsessed with learning if and when he and his family will be released.
I heard a rumor earlier this year that Khin Nyunt had requested permission for nine Buddhist monks to make merit at his house. Apparently, the request was partially granted—the regime allowed three monks. Why? Perhaps there was a concern that Khin Nyunt was going to perform an act of yadaya. It wouldn’t have escaped the current generals’ interest that “9” was the lucky number for the previous regime.
Burmese farmers know only too well of the regime’s obsessive policies. First it was physic nuts. Then it was sunflowers (translated into Burmese as nay kyar, meaning “long stay”). In 2007, farmers in Pegu Division were forced to grow whatever Than Shwe was advised would ensure his “long stay” in power, even if it meant turning this agrarian society into a Banana Republic.
Notoriously superstitious, Than Shwe is no stranger to yadaya and astrology. Indeed his latest act of voodoo had all the hallmarks of a man possessed.
When UN chief Ban Ki-moon and envoy Ibrahim Gambari came to Burma earlier this year, there was a mysterious detour to their scheduled itineraries.
When visiting Rangoon’s famous Shwedagon Pagoda, they were guided to a newly installed Buddhist statue, which appeared to be made of jade and had never been seen in public before.
On separate occasions, the UN dignitaries were given photo-op moments to make an offering and pray in front of the sculpture.
It may have missed the gaze of Ban and Gambari, but no one else failed to notice that the face of the statue was not so serene and Buddha-like. It was, in fact, an effigy of Than Shwe.
Embarrassed inner-circle officials later admitted that they had to carry out this crazy ritual at the behest of the narcissistic octogenarian.
My informed astrologer in Naypyidaw had one more amusing story to share with me.
Whenever a UN envoy visits Burma, hotel staff are told to install a strip of a pregnant woman’s sarong or underwear within the ceiling of the VIP’s suite. Traditional Burmese men are often superstitious that coming into contact with women’s undergarments will diminish their hpoun, or manly power.
At least in the case of Ban and Gambari, that curse appears to be working.
Whenever I speak to diplomats or foreign friends who want to learn more about Burma, I encourage them to draw parallels between the political decisions in the country and astrology, or moreover, yadaya, the Burmese form of voodoo.
It is an open secret that Burma’s military leaders believe deeply in various superstitions—astrology, occultism, numerology, black magic, yadaya.
Throughout our recent history, auspicious dates, times, units of currency and countless other properties have been reset according to the advice of the junta leaders’ astrologers.
During the era of Gen Ne Win, the number 9 became the satanic mark of the regime. Even the national currency was altered to denominations of nine, with 45-kyat and 90-kyat notes suddenly, and without warning, circulated in place of the existing currency.
As 2009 draws near, many observers inside and outside the country have been amused to find out that the new symbol of power for the paranoid generals of Naypyidaw has been unveiled as the number 11.
Though speculation is rife, no one knows for sure how or why 11 suddenly became the military government’s talisman.
In September, the regime released 9,002 prisoners. Of course, 9002 inverted becomes 2009, so I was intrigued as to whether this seemingly random number had been manipulated.
I approached an exiled former astrologer of the junta’s top brass and asked him if there was some superstitious meaning behind it.
He told me that the number of released prisoners quoted in the Burmese press was never the true figure; it could be a few dozen prisoners, it could be hundreds. But the number quoted was always consistent with the advice of an astrologer.
We mused on the fact that the total sum of the digits in 9002 is 11 (9+2).
Shortly after, the Burmese authorities began sentencing prominent pro-democracy activists. The numerology was consistent—several dissidents, including Min Ko Naing, for years one of the greatest thorns in the junta’s side, were in November (the 11th month) handed down sentences of 65 years (6+5=11). To hammer the point home, the sentences were pronounced at 11am.
Was an astrologer consulted before these judicial decisions were made? “Absolutely!” the exiled astrologer told me.
“So enlighten me!” I beseeched him. “Why 11?”
He reminded me that in Burmese Buddhist tradition, there are “eleven fires”— greed, hatred, delusion, birth, aging, death, grief, lamentation, pain, sorrow and despair—which, in a spiritual context, are fueled by sentient attachment.
So, I was left to wonder, are the generals trying to prevent the “eleven fires” from befalling them? Surely, the generals are aware that under their rule, the people of Burma need not be reminded about the fires of suffering?
We know that both former and current military leaders have practiced yadaya to ward off misfortune and that many have had private astrologers on their staff.
When Ne Win was in power, one of his aides, Sein Lwin, who was president of Burma for two weeks during the turbulent summer of 1988, regularly consulted astrologers to foresee the future.
In some cases Sein Lwin—known forevermore as “The Butcher of Rangoon” after he ordered a bloody crackdown on unarmed protesters—would even meet his official astrologers to seek assurance of who would fill the top cabinet positions whenever Ne Win purged one of his top brass.
Apart from official astrologers, Burma’s military leaders usually keep close to their sides any Buddhist monks who are well-known for reading palms and predicting the future.
In 2002, Ne Win’s grandsons were arrested for planning an overthrow of the government. Aung Pwint Khaung, the dictator’s family astrologer, was also detained. The raid evidently uncovered a cache of voodoo-like dolls said to closely resemble the regime’s top three generals—Snr-Gen Than Shwe, Gen Maung Aye and Gen Khin Nyunt.
A similar situation unfolded in 2004 when astrologer Bodaw Than Hla was arrested along with his patron, Khin Nyunt. Both were thrown in prison. Although Khin Nyunt remains under house arrest, to this day rumors circulate that the former spy chief still seeks advice from astrologers via a messenger. Word has it that Khin Nyunt is obsessed with learning if and when he and his family will be released.
I heard a rumor earlier this year that Khin Nyunt had requested permission for nine Buddhist monks to make merit at his house. Apparently, the request was partially granted—the regime allowed three monks. Why? Perhaps there was a concern that Khin Nyunt was going to perform an act of yadaya. It wouldn’t have escaped the current generals’ interest that “9” was the lucky number for the previous regime.
Burmese farmers know only too well of the regime’s obsessive policies. First it was physic nuts. Then it was sunflowers (translated into Burmese as nay kyar, meaning “long stay”). In 2007, farmers in Pegu Division were forced to grow whatever Than Shwe was advised would ensure his “long stay” in power, even if it meant turning this agrarian society into a Banana Republic.
Notoriously superstitious, Than Shwe is no stranger to yadaya and astrology. Indeed his latest act of voodoo had all the hallmarks of a man possessed.
When UN chief Ban Ki-moon and envoy Ibrahim Gambari came to Burma earlier this year, there was a mysterious detour to their scheduled itineraries.
When visiting Rangoon’s famous Shwedagon Pagoda, they were guided to a newly installed Buddhist statue, which appeared to be made of jade and had never been seen in public before.
On separate occasions, the UN dignitaries were given photo-op moments to make an offering and pray in front of the sculpture.
It may have missed the gaze of Ban and Gambari, but no one else failed to notice that the face of the statue was not so serene and Buddha-like. It was, in fact, an effigy of Than Shwe.
Embarrassed inner-circle officials later admitted that they had to carry out this crazy ritual at the behest of the narcissistic octogenarian.
My informed astrologer in Naypyidaw had one more amusing story to share with me.
Whenever a UN envoy visits Burma, hotel staff are told to install a strip of a pregnant woman’s sarong or underwear within the ceiling of the VIP’s suite. Traditional Burmese men are often superstitious that coming into contact with women’s undergarments will diminish their hpoun, or manly power.
At least in the case of Ban and Gambari, that curse appears to be working.
Journalists Demand Thai Police Drop Lese-Majesty Complaint
By MICHAEL CASEY / AP WRITER
BANGKOK — A group that campaigns for journalists' rights called on Thai police on Thursday to drop complaints against a British Broadcasting Corp. journalist accused of slandering the country's king.
BBC correspondent Jonathan Head has been accused of insulting the monarchy, or lese-majesty, a crime punishable by up to 15 years in prison. Three complaints were lodged by police Lt-Col Wattanasak Mungkandee, who said he was acting in a personal capacity.
Authorities have yet to decide whether to formally charge Head.
"It is time for prosecutors and investigators in Thailand to immediately drop these outrageous and punitive charges against our colleague Jonathan Head," said Bob Dietz of the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists. "Head's reporting has raised important questions about Thailand's deteriorating political situation, and he should be allowed to report without fear of official reprisals."
One complaint is related to a Dec. 3 article in which Head speculated about the relationship between the palace and the People’s Alliance for Democracy, an anti-government protest group that took over Bangkok's main international and domestic airports for eight days.
In the earlier complaint in May, Wattanasak submitted as evidence 11 articles from the BBC Web site, even though some were not written by Head. He also submitted a photograph of Head shaking hands with former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra before an interview in late 2001.
Thaksin, accused of corruption and abuse of power, was ousted by a September 2006 military coup. His critics also accused him of trying to usurp royal power and being disrespectful to the king.
The BBC, one of the world's major newsgathering organizations, has in the past described the allegations as "completely unfounded."
When reached by phone Thursday, Head said the BBC had no further comment.
The majority of Thais revere 81-year-old King Bhumibol Adulyadej. However, insulting the monarchy, a crime known as lese-majesty, is sometimes used for political purposes to smear its targets.
Wattanasak said he was acting on behalf of Thais who have come to him complaining about Head's coverage.
"As a Thai, I made a decision that I had to do something to let foreign reporters know that Thais are not happy with those who write something bad about our royal family," Wattanasak told The Associated Press.
BANGKOK — A group that campaigns for journalists' rights called on Thai police on Thursday to drop complaints against a British Broadcasting Corp. journalist accused of slandering the country's king.
BBC correspondent Jonathan Head has been accused of insulting the monarchy, or lese-majesty, a crime punishable by up to 15 years in prison. Three complaints were lodged by police Lt-Col Wattanasak Mungkandee, who said he was acting in a personal capacity.
Authorities have yet to decide whether to formally charge Head.
"It is time for prosecutors and investigators in Thailand to immediately drop these outrageous and punitive charges against our colleague Jonathan Head," said Bob Dietz of the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists. "Head's reporting has raised important questions about Thailand's deteriorating political situation, and he should be allowed to report without fear of official reprisals."
One complaint is related to a Dec. 3 article in which Head speculated about the relationship between the palace and the People’s Alliance for Democracy, an anti-government protest group that took over Bangkok's main international and domestic airports for eight days.
In the earlier complaint in May, Wattanasak submitted as evidence 11 articles from the BBC Web site, even though some were not written by Head. He also submitted a photograph of Head shaking hands with former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra before an interview in late 2001.
Thaksin, accused of corruption and abuse of power, was ousted by a September 2006 military coup. His critics also accused him of trying to usurp royal power and being disrespectful to the king.
The BBC, one of the world's major newsgathering organizations, has in the past described the allegations as "completely unfounded."
When reached by phone Thursday, Head said the BBC had no further comment.
The majority of Thais revere 81-year-old King Bhumibol Adulyadej. However, insulting the monarchy, a crime known as lese-majesty, is sometimes used for political purposes to smear its targets.
Wattanasak said he was acting on behalf of Thais who have come to him complaining about Head's coverage.
"As a Thai, I made a decision that I had to do something to let foreign reporters know that Thais are not happy with those who write something bad about our royal family," Wattanasak told The Associated Press.
December 24, 2008
Offering Hope for the Year Ahead
By YENI
Christmas and the New Year are times of celebration for families around the world; but in Burma, there is little to lift the spirits of relatives of those who will be spending this holiday season—and many more to come—behind bars.
This year, hundreds of pro-democracy activists were added to the long list of political prisoners languishing in Burma’s gulag—a fact that would normally serve as merely further evidence of the ruling regime’s callous disregard for human dignity.
But this time, the imprisoned dissidents and their families must bear an added insult: the knowledge that the generals are growing ever more confident that their efforts to cement their hold on power will ultimately win the grudging acceptance of the international community.
This, at least, is the message of hopelessness that seems to be emanating from the United Nations, which started the year with a flurry of activity in response to the junta’s highly publicized atrocities in late 2007, only to end it with an exasperated shrug of the shoulders.
In early December, a group of 112 former presidents and prime ministers decided it was time to press UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to return to Burma to talk to the junta. “We urge you to make it clear that all political prisoners in Burma must be released by the end of this year, regardless of whether you travel to Burma,” they wrote.
Later, more than 240 Asian lawmakers also joined forces to call for UN action on Burma, and a group of Nobel laureates made a similar appeal. But a spokesperson for the UN chief, who had visited Burma in late May to persuade the regime to accept full-scale international assistance to deal with the devastation caused by Cyclone Nargis, made it clear that neither he nor his special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari, would return to the country in the foreseeable future.
At a year-end news conference, Ban expressed his deep “disappointment” at the unwillingness of the Burmese military junta to listen to the world community’s calls to reestablish democracy in the country.
But this did little to assure Burmese pro-democracy activists and their supporters that the UN was serious about pushing the Burmese regime to start a peaceful reconciliation process, as called for in UN Security Council resolutions.
In their recent declaration, the Nobel laureates voiced concern that the UN’s drive for Burmese reconciliation was at a standstill. “We feel at risk of losing a precious opportunity for peace in Burma,” they announced.
But Ban defended his position, saying that his direct involvement was “not enough” to break the current political deadlock in Burma. He also urged Burma’s neighbors to play a more assertive role, although he knows as well as anyone else that China, India and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations are all more interested in exploiting Burma’s resources than in solving its political problems.
In the meantime, the pro-democracy opposition is losing confidence in Gambari’s efforts, and the regime is growing more contemptuous of his attempts to represent the UN’s position on Burma’s political and human rights issues. In a secret document leaked to The Irrawaddy by a Burmese foreign ministry source, the junta indicated that it had no interest in meeting with him again in the near future.
It is a sad statement on UN efforts to end Burma’s political deadlock that this year, for the first time ever, democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi also saw no point in meeting with the special envoy during his latest visit in August.
If Suu Kyi, who has become an international symbol of commitment to the universal values that the UN espouses, has reached this point, how much deeper must be the despair of those who know that their voices may never again be heard beyond the bars of their prison cells?
In the year ahead, the UN must redouble its efforts to resolve Burma’s political crisis, and this must involve sending an unequivocal message to the junta that no amount of “cooperation” with relief efforts in the cyclone-stricken Irrawaddy delta will obviate the need for the political changes that the people of Burma demand.
This means, above all, removing all doubt about where the UN stands on the junta’s planned election in 2010, which it has already given every indication it has no intention of losing. The UN’s failure to come out clearly against the junta’s farcical “road map” to a phony democracy is the primary reason that there has been no meaningful progress in Burma over the past year.
UN officials may argue that rejecting the generals’ pet project will only lead to further impasse. But this is far better than condemning another generation of Burmese to the political future envisioned by the junta.
If the UN wants to send the Burmese people a message of hope for the coming year, it could do no better than to tell Burma’s rulers that sham reforms are not the way forward.
Christmas and the New Year are times of celebration for families around the world; but in Burma, there is little to lift the spirits of relatives of those who will be spending this holiday season—and many more to come—behind bars.
This year, hundreds of pro-democracy activists were added to the long list of political prisoners languishing in Burma’s gulag—a fact that would normally serve as merely further evidence of the ruling regime’s callous disregard for human dignity.
But this time, the imprisoned dissidents and their families must bear an added insult: the knowledge that the generals are growing ever more confident that their efforts to cement their hold on power will ultimately win the grudging acceptance of the international community.
This, at least, is the message of hopelessness that seems to be emanating from the United Nations, which started the year with a flurry of activity in response to the junta’s highly publicized atrocities in late 2007, only to end it with an exasperated shrug of the shoulders.
In early December, a group of 112 former presidents and prime ministers decided it was time to press UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to return to Burma to talk to the junta. “We urge you to make it clear that all political prisoners in Burma must be released by the end of this year, regardless of whether you travel to Burma,” they wrote.
Later, more than 240 Asian lawmakers also joined forces to call for UN action on Burma, and a group of Nobel laureates made a similar appeal. But a spokesperson for the UN chief, who had visited Burma in late May to persuade the regime to accept full-scale international assistance to deal with the devastation caused by Cyclone Nargis, made it clear that neither he nor his special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari, would return to the country in the foreseeable future.
At a year-end news conference, Ban expressed his deep “disappointment” at the unwillingness of the Burmese military junta to listen to the world community’s calls to reestablish democracy in the country.
But this did little to assure Burmese pro-democracy activists and their supporters that the UN was serious about pushing the Burmese regime to start a peaceful reconciliation process, as called for in UN Security Council resolutions.
In their recent declaration, the Nobel laureates voiced concern that the UN’s drive for Burmese reconciliation was at a standstill. “We feel at risk of losing a precious opportunity for peace in Burma,” they announced.
But Ban defended his position, saying that his direct involvement was “not enough” to break the current political deadlock in Burma. He also urged Burma’s neighbors to play a more assertive role, although he knows as well as anyone else that China, India and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations are all more interested in exploiting Burma’s resources than in solving its political problems.
In the meantime, the pro-democracy opposition is losing confidence in Gambari’s efforts, and the regime is growing more contemptuous of his attempts to represent the UN’s position on Burma’s political and human rights issues. In a secret document leaked to The Irrawaddy by a Burmese foreign ministry source, the junta indicated that it had no interest in meeting with him again in the near future.
It is a sad statement on UN efforts to end Burma’s political deadlock that this year, for the first time ever, democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi also saw no point in meeting with the special envoy during his latest visit in August.
If Suu Kyi, who has become an international symbol of commitment to the universal values that the UN espouses, has reached this point, how much deeper must be the despair of those who know that their voices may never again be heard beyond the bars of their prison cells?
In the year ahead, the UN must redouble its efforts to resolve Burma’s political crisis, and this must involve sending an unequivocal message to the junta that no amount of “cooperation” with relief efforts in the cyclone-stricken Irrawaddy delta will obviate the need for the political changes that the people of Burma demand.
This means, above all, removing all doubt about where the UN stands on the junta’s planned election in 2010, which it has already given every indication it has no intention of losing. The UN’s failure to come out clearly against the junta’s farcical “road map” to a phony democracy is the primary reason that there has been no meaningful progress in Burma over the past year.
UN officials may argue that rejecting the generals’ pet project will only lead to further impasse. But this is far better than condemning another generation of Burmese to the political future envisioned by the junta.
If the UN wants to send the Burmese people a message of hope for the coming year, it could do no better than to tell Burma’s rulers that sham reforms are not the way forward.
More International Pressure in 2009: Burmese Diplomat
By WAI MOE
Burma’s top diplomat at the United Nations says he expects more UN pressure from Western governments for national reconciliation in 2009.
Burma’s UN representative, Kyaw Tint Swe, said in a confidential report to Burma’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs that there will be pressure on Burma at the UN Security Council, particular from Western countries. Also, he said, the West will have more influence in the Security Council when Japan and Uganda replace Indonesia and South Africa in January.
“Western countries could raise issues related to Burma at the Security Council by discussing and announcing a presidential statement in December,” he wrote, “and if the attempt doesn’t succeed, they could try again in January.” Kyaw Tint Swe wrote his report following a meeting of the “Friends of the Secretary-General on Myanmar,” held in on December 5.
The diplomat said in the report that if Burma cooperates with Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s good offices role, countries such as Russia, China, Vietnam, Libya and other developing countries in Africa would probably continue to support Burma.
The diplomat also wrote that UN special envoy to Burma Ibrahim Gambari met with three Burmese diplomats—Kyaw Tint Swe, Than Swe and Tin Maung Naing—to explain the meeting of the “Friend of the Secretary-General on Myanmar.”
Gambari told Burmese diplomats that Ban called the meeting because of concerns expressed by some UN member countries as well as 112 former world leaders and lawmakers from Asian.
The Nigerian diplomat said Ban was disappointed with the lack of progress in achieving national reconciliation in Burma, according to the report.
Gambari reportedly said that Ban told the gathering that he would temporarily suspend his good offices mission, and there were strong objections from Russia, China, India and Singapore.
Along with the United States and France, the United Kingdom also strongly criticized the role of the good offices mission at the meeting, Gambari told Burmese diplomats.
The “Friends of the Secretary-General on Myanmar” include the US, UK, China, Russia, France, Indonesia, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, the EU, India, Japan, Australia and Norway.
Gambari said that if there was progress in reconciliation in Burma before the new administration in the US, the US government’s Burma policy might be modified, according to the report.
The report said Western countries’ attempts to put the Burma issue before the UN Security Council were not successful because Russia, China, Vietnam and Indonesia supported the Burmese regime.
Kyaw Tint Swe’s accused Western countries of trying to eliminate the UN good offices mission on Burma because of its failure to achieve progress.
Even though there has been criticism and suggestions to replace Gambari, he is still in office with support from Russia and Asian countries, the report said.
Burma’s top diplomat at the United Nations says he expects more UN pressure from Western governments for national reconciliation in 2009.
Burma’s UN representative, Kyaw Tint Swe, said in a confidential report to Burma’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs that there will be pressure on Burma at the UN Security Council, particular from Western countries. Also, he said, the West will have more influence in the Security Council when Japan and Uganda replace Indonesia and South Africa in January.
“Western countries could raise issues related to Burma at the Security Council by discussing and announcing a presidential statement in December,” he wrote, “and if the attempt doesn’t succeed, they could try again in January.” Kyaw Tint Swe wrote his report following a meeting of the “Friends of the Secretary-General on Myanmar,” held in on December 5.
The diplomat said in the report that if Burma cooperates with Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s good offices role, countries such as Russia, China, Vietnam, Libya and other developing countries in Africa would probably continue to support Burma.
The diplomat also wrote that UN special envoy to Burma Ibrahim Gambari met with three Burmese diplomats—Kyaw Tint Swe, Than Swe and Tin Maung Naing—to explain the meeting of the “Friend of the Secretary-General on Myanmar.”
Gambari told Burmese diplomats that Ban called the meeting because of concerns expressed by some UN member countries as well as 112 former world leaders and lawmakers from Asian.
The Nigerian diplomat said Ban was disappointed with the lack of progress in achieving national reconciliation in Burma, according to the report.
Gambari reportedly said that Ban told the gathering that he would temporarily suspend his good offices mission, and there were strong objections from Russia, China, India and Singapore.
Along with the United States and France, the United Kingdom also strongly criticized the role of the good offices mission at the meeting, Gambari told Burmese diplomats.
The “Friends of the Secretary-General on Myanmar” include the US, UK, China, Russia, France, Indonesia, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, the EU, India, Japan, Australia and Norway.
Gambari said that if there was progress in reconciliation in Burma before the new administration in the US, the US government’s Burma policy might be modified, according to the report.
The report said Western countries’ attempts to put the Burma issue before the UN Security Council were not successful because Russia, China, Vietnam and Indonesia supported the Burmese regime.
Kyaw Tint Swe’s accused Western countries of trying to eliminate the UN good offices mission on Burma because of its failure to achieve progress.
Even though there has been criticism and suggestions to replace Gambari, he is still in office with support from Russia and Asian countries, the report said.
Political Prisoner Commits Suicide
By SAW YAN NAING
A Burmese political prisoner, Maung San, committed suicide in Pegu Prison in central Burma on Dec. 19, according to sources in Pegu Division.
Maung San, who was about 35 years old, was serving a two-year prison term.
He committed suicide in a prison restroom, following the refusal of prison authorities to provide proper medical treatment outside the prison. He suffered from intestinal problems and liver disease, sources said.
A source said Maung San’s decision to take his own life stemmed from frustration over medical treatment, and his inability to talk freely with his family.
“He suffered from a serious illness, and he thought it would be better if he died instead of suffered,” said the source.
His family last visited with Maung San on Dec. 13 in Pegu Prison.
“When his family visited him in prison, his health condition was bad,” said the source. “He had asked prison authorities for proper medical treatment, but the authorities refused his request.”
Bo Kyi, joint-secretary of the Thailand-based Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma), said “The health condition of political prisoners is worse day by day. We are very concerned that they don’t receive proper medical treatment.”
“By ignoring serious illnesses, the Burmese authorities are conducting murder,” Bo Kyi said.
Sources said that Pegu Prison authorities impose many restrictions in dealing with political prisoners and their families.
In other prison news, in early December, Aung Kyaw Oo, a youth member of the opposition National League for Democracy who is serving a 19-year sentence in Pegu Prison, was savagely beaten and denied medical treatment, according to reports.
When Aung Kyaw Oo’s wife visited the prison on Dec. 3, she was denied permission to see him. She was allowed to visit him on Dec. 13.
On December 22, political prisoner Khin Maung Cho received an additional 5-year prison sentence. He is imprisoned in Yankin Township in Rangoon. He was sentenced under Immigration Act 13/1. On December 8, he was given 19 years imprisonment on a separate charge.
There are more than 2,100 political prisoners in Burma, according to human rights groups.
A Burmese political prisoner, Maung San, committed suicide in Pegu Prison in central Burma on Dec. 19, according to sources in Pegu Division.
Maung San, who was about 35 years old, was serving a two-year prison term.
He committed suicide in a prison restroom, following the refusal of prison authorities to provide proper medical treatment outside the prison. He suffered from intestinal problems and liver disease, sources said.
A source said Maung San’s decision to take his own life stemmed from frustration over medical treatment, and his inability to talk freely with his family.
“He suffered from a serious illness, and he thought it would be better if he died instead of suffered,” said the source.
His family last visited with Maung San on Dec. 13 in Pegu Prison.
“When his family visited him in prison, his health condition was bad,” said the source. “He had asked prison authorities for proper medical treatment, but the authorities refused his request.”
Bo Kyi, joint-secretary of the Thailand-based Assistance Association for Political Prisoners (Burma), said “The health condition of political prisoners is worse day by day. We are very concerned that they don’t receive proper medical treatment.”
“By ignoring serious illnesses, the Burmese authorities are conducting murder,” Bo Kyi said.
Sources said that Pegu Prison authorities impose many restrictions in dealing with political prisoners and their families.
In other prison news, in early December, Aung Kyaw Oo, a youth member of the opposition National League for Democracy who is serving a 19-year sentence in Pegu Prison, was savagely beaten and denied medical treatment, according to reports.
When Aung Kyaw Oo’s wife visited the prison on Dec. 3, she was denied permission to see him. She was allowed to visit him on Dec. 13.
On December 22, political prisoner Khin Maung Cho received an additional 5-year prison sentence. He is imprisoned in Yankin Township in Rangoon. He was sentenced under Immigration Act 13/1. On December 8, he was given 19 years imprisonment on a separate charge.
There are more than 2,100 political prisoners in Burma, according to human rights groups.
Junta Militants Arrested in Thailand: BBC
By MIN LWIN
Thai authorities in the border town of Mae Sot have arrested an armed group of Burmese nationals, including women, who reportedly said that the Burmese military government had sent them to Thailand, according to BBC Burmese radio on Monday.
The BBC Burmese service said that 10 members of an unknown armed group were arrested and weapons were seized from at least four of them.
Sources in Mae Sot said that the Burmese junta has targeted prominent opposition leaders in exile in the past, as well as leaders of armed ethnic groups, pro-democracy organizations and human rights organizations, especially those based in Mae Sot.
Several dissidents along the Thai-Burmese border have claimed that assassinations have been ordered by the junta and suggested that Karen National Union General Secretary Mahn Sha was gunned down on February 14 by junta-backed assassins, although the murder was never officially solved.
Twenty undercover agents from the Burmese military authorities have been assigned and deployed in Thailand’s Mae Sot area to carry out assassinations, said opposition sources on the Thai-Burmese border.
Thai authorities in the border town of Mae Sot have arrested an armed group of Burmese nationals, including women, who reportedly said that the Burmese military government had sent them to Thailand, according to BBC Burmese radio on Monday.
The BBC Burmese service said that 10 members of an unknown armed group were arrested and weapons were seized from at least four of them.
Sources in Mae Sot said that the Burmese junta has targeted prominent opposition leaders in exile in the past, as well as leaders of armed ethnic groups, pro-democracy organizations and human rights organizations, especially those based in Mae Sot.
Several dissidents along the Thai-Burmese border have claimed that assassinations have been ordered by the junta and suggested that Karen National Union General Secretary Mahn Sha was gunned down on February 14 by junta-backed assassins, although the murder was never officially solved.
Twenty undercover agents from the Burmese military authorities have been assigned and deployed in Thailand’s Mae Sot area to carry out assassinations, said opposition sources on the Thai-Burmese border.
NMSP Celebrates 50th Anniversary
By LAWI WENG
The New Mon State Party (NMSP) on Tuesday marked the 50th anniversary of its founding with a day of celebration and ceremony in Wai Zin, nine kilometers from Ye Township, in Mon State.
According to a participant, thousands of people from all over Mon State attended the event, including representatives from Mudon, Thanbyuzayaut and Moulmein.
Speaking to The Irrawaddy, Nyan Tun, a colonel with the Mon National Liberation Army (MNLA), the armed wing of the NMSP, said, “The celebration is a sign of the support we get from our people. This is a time when we should all be united and strong.”
The NMSP was founded in July 1958 by Nai Shwe Kyin who was, at that time, the only member. He established the party after the Mon People’s Front (MPF) disarmed in a peace agreement with U Nu’s government.
He immediately joined forces with the Karen National Union (KNU) and took up arms to fight to fight the Burmese government for the autonomy of Mon State in a federal Burma.
In 1995, after 37 years of civil war, the NMSP signed a ceasefire agreement with the Burmese military government.
Za Hang Mon, a well-known Mon singer, once called Nai Shwe Kyin “a guy who tries to spit at the sky, but his spit will never reach the sky,” meaning that in signing the ceasefire agreement, he would never achieve the aspirations of the Mon people.
Nai Shwe Kyin passed away in Moulmein in 2003.
Although it did not compete in the 1990 elections, the NMSP attended the national convention in 2003; however, its proposal of federalism was rejected. Later, the party only sent observers to the convention.
“The Burmese military will never listen to the NMSP,” said the chairman of the Australia-based Mon National Council, Nai Pe Thein Zar, on Tuesday.
“The NMSP is taking the wrong political path. They have lost the support of the people ever since they signed the ceasefire agreement,” he added.
However, some Mon political observers argue that despite the setbacks, the real success of the NMSP since 1995 lies in education initiatives in Mon State.
According to statistics from the Mon National Education Department, there are currently 157 schools teaching in Mon language in Mon State, while 114 schools offer a mixed curriculum of Burmese and Mon-language lessons.
The educational progress came after the NMSP entered into an informal understanding with the Burmese military government that Mon language could be taught in state-run schools in Mon State, said observers.
The NMSP released a statement denouncing the junta’s referendum in early March, citing fears that the process would strengthen the regime by giving it the veneer of democracy without resulting in any actual changes.
Speaking recently to The Irrawaddy, a source close to the NSMP leadership said that the party would not participate in the 2010 election. He added that the NMSP still refused to surrender their arms.
However, Nai Shwe Thein, a member of NMSP executive committee said, “We will decide whether to join in the election at our national convention at the end of December.”
The New Mon State Party (NMSP) on Tuesday marked the 50th anniversary of its founding with a day of celebration and ceremony in Wai Zin, nine kilometers from Ye Township, in Mon State.
According to a participant, thousands of people from all over Mon State attended the event, including representatives from Mudon, Thanbyuzayaut and Moulmein.
Speaking to The Irrawaddy, Nyan Tun, a colonel with the Mon National Liberation Army (MNLA), the armed wing of the NMSP, said, “The celebration is a sign of the support we get from our people. This is a time when we should all be united and strong.”
The NMSP was founded in July 1958 by Nai Shwe Kyin who was, at that time, the only member. He established the party after the Mon People’s Front (MPF) disarmed in a peace agreement with U Nu’s government.
He immediately joined forces with the Karen National Union (KNU) and took up arms to fight to fight the Burmese government for the autonomy of Mon State in a federal Burma.
In 1995, after 37 years of civil war, the NMSP signed a ceasefire agreement with the Burmese military government.
Za Hang Mon, a well-known Mon singer, once called Nai Shwe Kyin “a guy who tries to spit at the sky, but his spit will never reach the sky,” meaning that in signing the ceasefire agreement, he would never achieve the aspirations of the Mon people.
Nai Shwe Kyin passed away in Moulmein in 2003.
Although it did not compete in the 1990 elections, the NMSP attended the national convention in 2003; however, its proposal of federalism was rejected. Later, the party only sent observers to the convention.
“The Burmese military will never listen to the NMSP,” said the chairman of the Australia-based Mon National Council, Nai Pe Thein Zar, on Tuesday.
“The NMSP is taking the wrong political path. They have lost the support of the people ever since they signed the ceasefire agreement,” he added.
However, some Mon political observers argue that despite the setbacks, the real success of the NMSP since 1995 lies in education initiatives in Mon State.
According to statistics from the Mon National Education Department, there are currently 157 schools teaching in Mon language in Mon State, while 114 schools offer a mixed curriculum of Burmese and Mon-language lessons.
The educational progress came after the NMSP entered into an informal understanding with the Burmese military government that Mon language could be taught in state-run schools in Mon State, said observers.
The NMSP released a statement denouncing the junta’s referendum in early March, citing fears that the process would strengthen the regime by giving it the veneer of democracy without resulting in any actual changes.
Speaking recently to The Irrawaddy, a source close to the NSMP leadership said that the party would not participate in the 2010 election. He added that the NMSP still refused to surrender their arms.
However, Nai Shwe Thein, a member of NMSP executive committee said, “We will decide whether to join in the election at our national convention at the end of December.”
Korea Rejects Charge of Rights Abuse in Burma
By WILLIAM BOOT
BANGKOK — The South Korean government has rejected a complaint that two Korean companies have condoned human rights abuses and failed to meet international standards in Burma in pursuit of gas exploration.
The complaint alleged that industrial conglomerate Daewoo International and government-owned Korea Gas Corporation had failed to comply with guidelines on corporate responsibility and investment laid down by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
South Korea is a member of the OECD, which is made up of the world’s leading industrialized countries.
The allegation was lodged by the U.S.-based group EarthRights International (ERI) and backed by several other organizations including South Korea’s two biggest labor union federations.
Daewoo and Korea Gas are partners in a consortium developing the huge Shwe gas field off the west coast of Burma close to Bangladesh.
ERI contends that “human rights abuses have been perpetrated against local people opposing Daewoo’s Shwe Gas Project.”
It also says Daewoo’s plan to construct a trans-Burma gas pipeline to China from the Shwe field “poses an unreasonably high risk of more serious and widespread human rights and environmental impacts.”
South Korea’s Ministry of Knowledge Economy has rejected the complaint “on all counts,” ERI said on Wednesday.
“Moreover, the [ministry] opined that the general situation in Burma and specifically around the Shwe Project does not merit an investigation or arbitration between the companies and the complainants,” ERI said in a statement. “[It] flies in the face of evidence from groups and communities from within the proposed pipeline area in Burma.”
ERI alleged in its October complaint to the South Korean government that Daewoo and Korea Gas—also known as KOGAS—are in breach of at least six OECD guidelines “by failing to respect human rights, contributing to forced labor, failing to promote sustainable development, failing to disclose information about the project, failing to consult with local populations and by failing to conduct an environmental impact assessment according to international standards.”
ERI says it was only informed of the complaint rejection indirectly and unofficially via a co-complainant in South Korea.
“If Daewoo and KOGAS were to genuinely conform to the (OECD) guidelines, the Shwe Project would have to be postponed, which evidently is against the priorities of both the companies and the ministry,” said Matthew Smith, Burma Project Coordinator at ERI.
“These companies and the Korean government are now on notice that negative social and environmental impacts from this project have begun, and are likely to continue and accelerate if this project moves forward. These companies bear responsibility for these abuses, and the Korean government is failing in its obligations under the OECD guidelines to prevent these harms. The blood of the people of Burma will be on their hands.”
ERI and its supporters complained that Daewoo and Korea Gas are in breach of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.
Daewoo is the main developer in the Shwe consortium with a 51 percent stake. Korea Gas holds 8.5 percent.
The field has recoverable reserves of at least 6 trillion cubic feet of gas, all of which is being purchased by China.
ERI says its research indicates that the 1,100-mile gas pipeline through Burma will pass through at least 24 townships and close by several large population centers in Arakan State and four other regions including Shan State.
BANGKOK — The South Korean government has rejected a complaint that two Korean companies have condoned human rights abuses and failed to meet international standards in Burma in pursuit of gas exploration.
The complaint alleged that industrial conglomerate Daewoo International and government-owned Korea Gas Corporation had failed to comply with guidelines on corporate responsibility and investment laid down by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
South Korea is a member of the OECD, which is made up of the world’s leading industrialized countries.
The allegation was lodged by the U.S.-based group EarthRights International (ERI) and backed by several other organizations including South Korea’s two biggest labor union federations.
Daewoo and Korea Gas are partners in a consortium developing the huge Shwe gas field off the west coast of Burma close to Bangladesh.
ERI contends that “human rights abuses have been perpetrated against local people opposing Daewoo’s Shwe Gas Project.”
It also says Daewoo’s plan to construct a trans-Burma gas pipeline to China from the Shwe field “poses an unreasonably high risk of more serious and widespread human rights and environmental impacts.”
South Korea’s Ministry of Knowledge Economy has rejected the complaint “on all counts,” ERI said on Wednesday.
“Moreover, the [ministry] opined that the general situation in Burma and specifically around the Shwe Project does not merit an investigation or arbitration between the companies and the complainants,” ERI said in a statement. “[It] flies in the face of evidence from groups and communities from within the proposed pipeline area in Burma.”
ERI alleged in its October complaint to the South Korean government that Daewoo and Korea Gas—also known as KOGAS—are in breach of at least six OECD guidelines “by failing to respect human rights, contributing to forced labor, failing to promote sustainable development, failing to disclose information about the project, failing to consult with local populations and by failing to conduct an environmental impact assessment according to international standards.”
ERI says it was only informed of the complaint rejection indirectly and unofficially via a co-complainant in South Korea.
“If Daewoo and KOGAS were to genuinely conform to the (OECD) guidelines, the Shwe Project would have to be postponed, which evidently is against the priorities of both the companies and the ministry,” said Matthew Smith, Burma Project Coordinator at ERI.
“These companies and the Korean government are now on notice that negative social and environmental impacts from this project have begun, and are likely to continue and accelerate if this project moves forward. These companies bear responsibility for these abuses, and the Korean government is failing in its obligations under the OECD guidelines to prevent these harms. The blood of the people of Burma will be on their hands.”
ERI and its supporters complained that Daewoo and Korea Gas are in breach of the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.
Daewoo is the main developer in the Shwe consortium with a 51 percent stake. Korea Gas holds 8.5 percent.
The field has recoverable reserves of at least 6 trillion cubic feet of gas, all of which is being purchased by China.
ERI says its research indicates that the 1,100-mile gas pipeline through Burma will pass through at least 24 townships and close by several large population centers in Arakan State and four other regions including Shan State.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)